Talk:All your base are belong to us

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Former featured article All your base are belong to us is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.
Main Page trophy This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on March 4, 2004.
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Video games (Rated Start-class, Mid-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.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Sega task force.
WikiProject Internet culture (Rated Start-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet culture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of internet culture 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.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Animation / Computer / Web (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Animation, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to animation on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, help out with the open tasks, or contribute to the discussion.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
Checklist icon
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles that are spoken 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.

Restore to old version[edit]

I am proposing that some content of the 2004 version of this article to be restored and merged in to this article. This article was once a featured article. And now??? Start-class. what happened to this article? if only anyone could help bring back the content of the old revision...... --Fazbear7891 (talk) 05:35, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

Sounds like a good idea. Why not do it now? --Harryhenry1 (talk) 04:09, 11 July 2015 (UTC)


The translations read like fansubs. Literal translations are being used even when there are idomatic equivalents in the English language. Here are some alternatives: メインスクリーンにビジョンが来ます = We have visual. 連邦政府軍のご協力により、君達の基地は、全てCATSがいただいた。 = With the help of federation forces, all your bases are ours. (Or will be ours, depending on the context) せいぜい残り少ない命を、大切にしたまえ・・・・。 = Make the most of what little time you have. たのむぞ。ZIG!! = Come on. ZIG!! (It would be odd for such informal Japanese to be translated to such formal English the way it has.)

Try and think of something better and list it here. It must preserve the tone and context of the original. Slang must be met with slang. Informal with informal, etc...M miyama (talk) 15:03, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

That could work, with the line, 『せいぜい残り少ない命を、大切にしたまえ・・・・。』. :| (talk) 10:05, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

this needs a good title[edit]

"It was referenced in a comment immediately below the post by a user chsh1989[at]"

a) I don't think that is relevant and think it could be removed, and

b) It has been proven that adding stuff like person[at]example[dot]com in an email address will not prevent spammers from getting your email. (I'm too lazy to cite that, but someone set up a web page with seven test emails, each mangled in some way. Then, a year and a half later, they measured the volume of the spam received to each address in megabytes.) Hitechcomputergeek (talk) 01:37, 16 April 2015 (UTC)


Almost all references have been removed from the main page and archived here due to the near-infinite possible number of references that had been or could be added to the page.


I'm new to editing wikipedia and what not so I'm not sure where to start. I was going to edit this page because it is on Wikipedia:WikiProject Internet culture's to do list and I really am interested in internet culture but when I went to do some edits on this page it showed a warning. I think this wikipage could benefit from categories under the references section and filling them up a little more because there are very few references to where its been used. Thank You please respond I will check back periodically!

I edited your post so that it linked to Wikipedia:WikiProject Internet culture rather than displaying the contents of the entire page. Please preview your posts before saving and sign your posts using four tildes (~). Thanks, Newbie! Primogen (talk) 19:38, 8 March 2012 (UTC)


I hope I'm doing this right, I haven't editted on wikipedia in ages.

Well, as for the vandalism... "All your trash" "All your base are belong to Hartley" "All of your bases are under our Hartley." "Telephone communications say "Mouses are awesome" Operator: The main screen is receiving a virus...."

I am certain this is vandalism, so I'll go revert it, but just incase I've made a mistake or done something stupid, I thought I'd just mention it here first =]

Edit: Flip, I don't know which version to revert to. I'll leave it for a bit and see if anyone else wants to jump in first. If not, I'll do it myself. Sorry, it's been a while since I've done this... Dx

Edit 2: Ok, I went ahead with it... it should be alright now

-- (talk) 19:26, 15 April 2010 (UTC)


I've just reverted an edit in which the entire section on the translation was removed. Since the humor and notoriety of this entire phenomenon is derived from the mistranslation of the original text, I must disagree that it is "wholly unnecessary." Beeblebrox (talk) 20:29, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

I disagree. There needs to be an established importance to it - and besides, there aren't even citations for these translations. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 07:33, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
There is an very well established importance for the article on the whole, each individual detail does not need to independently prove notability. But even if it did, obviously the poor translation is the direct cause of the notability of this subject and the only thing anyone remembers from Zero Wing. Similarly, anyone who was fluent in Japanese and English could make the translation, we have a whole group of people here on Wikipedia who translate content for article use, and I don't believe they've ever been asked to cite a previous translation before. Beeblebrox (talk) 16:35, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
Being notable doesn't make it less necessary for an article to be discriminate in what it includes. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 19:43, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
My central point is that the translation is the source of the notability, the very thing that made this phrase notable in the first place and sparked one of the first truly huge internet memes. As it seems we are not going to agree on this point, I'm going to request input from WP:3O. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:50, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
But we have an image that displays the translation word-for-word. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 00:27, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
30 guys must be taking a break. True, there is a handy little flash animation that shows the bad translation, but it really makes it clear what a truly awful job was done with the translation to see it side by side with a correct version. Beeblebrox (talk) 17:18, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
I'm new to contributing so please don't be too aggressive if I'm missing something here. It seems to me that the game's intro as a whole can be considered part of the context of the phenomenon so having just a small part of the comparisons seems insufficient; as Beeblebrox said, without the table the phenomenon is only poorly described, and I see no reason not to include it to the full extent - while removing it is directly against the spirit of Wikipedia; it is an unnecessary removal of relevant background information. Thus, I see no reason at all why the removal is constructive to the purpose of the article and site. --Krainert (talk) 12:33, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

I came here looking for the translation, but it's not there. It's not as convenient to have to wait for the animation to play through before I get to see the whole thing. I also can't copy text from a GIF image. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 01:06, 15 November 2009 (UTC)


Having the direct comparison side-by-side makes it very clear what exactly went wrong in the translation, and really how hilarious this thing is and why it ever took off. That being said, the table is massive and disturbs the reading of the page (or, would if there were any significant content on the page). I'd even go so far as to say that the table might actual deter editors from adding content by being so obtrusive. If we think ahead to AYB as something other than a start-class article, would this table be appropriate to include? I really don't think so. As such, I don't think we should include the full thing in the article, especially as the gif accomplishes the task of giving the complete text of the meme, which is more than enough for the full context and understanding needed. I do feel that an in-text translation of the main phrase (and maybe another secondary phrase, such as "You have no chance to survive, make your time" or "Somebody set up us the bomb") could be appropriate in order to show the severe level of misunderstanding, but there would likely need to be more content to more fully round out the article. ~ Amory (usertalkcontribs) 03:48, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, you make several excellent points. I very much like your idea of just making a few of the most known examples. I'm guessing RetroHippie will be amenable to this as well, but I'll wait for him to weigh in before making changes. Beeblebrox (talk) 03:54, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
Choice examples would be cool. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 01:25, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done finally Beeblebrox (talk) 18:44, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
I was stunned to see what happened to this article. The full text of the Zero Wing intro and the full translation are gone. I've read the chat threads above that discussed why the changes were made, and while I appreciate everyone's sincerity here, what you've done to this once-great featured article is a terrible shame. It brings to mind the old saw that a camel is a horse designed by committee. I truly urge you to lose the example table and restore the full text and the full translation. Generations of WP readers to come will thank you for it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 00:37, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
Who would actully say "all of your bases are under our control." I would say All Your Bases Belong To Us/Me —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sghfdhdfghdfgfd (talkcontribs) 14:35, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
I enjoyed having the full text of the translation as well. I thought it was funny. My favorite translation was the broken English "It's you!!" (thrilled, like your girlfriend surprising you for your birthday). Previously Wikipedia had a wonderful, simple rending of this into correct English that perfectly captured the intent (instant recognition coupled with longtime animosity and mutual loathing). I came back here to refresh my memory of what the good translation had been, but, So Outta Luck, it's gone now. For what? I don't frankly have any conception of how this is seen as an improvement to the article. If you didn't want to read the full translation, no biggie, you scroll down one screenful. --Rnickel (talk) 21:23, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
There is a reference in popular culture that is new and not mentioned on here, but I don't know how to go about it. In the video game Ghostbusters, there is an etching in a stone in the graveyard that says, "All your souls are belong to us." BlewJ (talk) 13:29, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Being bold and reverting as per above[edit]

(From above discussion) I get the feeling that the whole translation was removed from the article to satisfy the wishes of one user alone, and there are already several anonymous and accountful users who think this was not a good decision. I have been bold and reverted the translation to the article, as I definitely see no reason why it should not be there. I see no copyright issue (famous, short dialogue is covered by fair use) and a Wikipedia-based translation which has been reviewed by tens or hundreds of thousands of Japanese-English bilingual readers is reliable – just for the sake of having been in Wikipedia for so many years. Thanks for not re-reverting without discussing first, hydrox (talk) 21:32, 15 May 2010 (UTC) (refactored 22 May 2010 00:46 UTC)

If the gist of a work can be conveyed by excerpts instead of the full text, then fair use only applies to those excerpts. A whole translation is unnecessary, appropriate examples get the idea across. There's plenty of other places where people can get the full translation, so Wikipedia doesn't need to have it. Wikisource might be a more appropriate place for the full version. Orpheus (talk) 15:52, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
From above comments it is deductible that people expect the full translation to be found in Wikipedia. I could give cautious support to moving the full translation to Wikisource, with clearly visible links from this article to the Wikisource page. Find my proposal below on right.
There is no fair use issue here. The doctrine specifically states that we can use limited quotations and citations of copyrighted works for "criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, or research." Also even if something can be expressed more tersely, as I understand it fair use does not require we do so, as long as the extended citation is still "non-substantial". Also, limited translation is obviously not the same as the full translation, and fails badly to convey anything of the original dialogue. The full copyrighted work here being the Sega Genesis game cartridge and the video game on it, even a full transcript of the introduction dialogue is still very much a non-substantial part of the full work. I would question if an animated image showing the dialogue was fair use (this article apparently still had one when the decision to trim the translation was made), but to my mind even the full written transcript is just too trivial to infringe any IPRs. --hydrox (talk) 17:11, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
What's the reason for having the full transcript? The comments above seem to boil down to "It's funny", or "I like it" which aren't good reasons to include in an encyclopedia. I think Wikisource is a much better place for it, and I agree fully with your link proposal. Orpheus (talk) 18:30, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Actually, it can not be moved to Wikisource at all. They do not accept fair use texts. I will however look into the possibility of moving the material to Wikiquote. --hydrox (talk) 22:40, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

All Your O Are Belong to Us[edit]

Google. Check it out: when you click today's logo, it searches "unexplained phenomenon". This is the most searched query on Google. But we do not know whether it is because Google links to it, or whether it is the reason for the logo. However, the story becomes even more complex. On Twitter, Google released a Tweet: "All Your O Are Belong To Us"- though in the simple code of numbers, where 1=a, 2=b, etc. Which connects and enhances the question: which came first? the Chicken or the egg. Because it looks like they're starting said unexplained phenomenon, based on the original phrase of All Your Base Are Belong to Us. Should this be included somewhere in the article? --DMP47 (talk) 17:08, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

It has been included. I just edited it briefly -- it could stand more work, especially explaining the A=1, B=2 code. (talk) 05:15, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
The unexplained phenomenon was referring to this: The AYOABTU was just there to make us even more puzzled about the unexplained phenomena. Takeda (talk) 20:24, 8 September 2009 (UTC)


  • I tried to move the animation into another section, since it's kind of weird just sitting there in it's own section, but I can't get it to sit next to the text, it seems to create it's own whitespace. I am by no means an expert on formatting such things, maybe somebody out there could take a crack at it? Beeblebrox (talk) 18:58, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Viral Videos on Youtube about the All Your Base Meme[edit]

Got a question. I noticed that some notable instances listed under the "References in mass media" section. (I.E.: "Invasion of the Gabber Robots") How popular does a video have to be in order to be listed in Wikipedia? My dispute is considerning JGTraveler's Zero Wing Hip-Hop remix. Is it worth discussing if it isn't "popular" enough? It has considerably gained a lot of views I believe is enough to earn a place under the "References in mass media" section! —Preceding unsigned comment added by DTraveler (talkcontribs) 23:53, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

It's not popularity that matters, it's notability. Basically we only want third-party references, preferably in mainstream media publications, otherwise the article will balloon into a huge list of links. Orpheus (talk) 03:55, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

So, Youtube references don't count? DTraveler (talk) 01:00, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

The problem is there are millions of videos on YouTube, and probably less than 1% of them are notable. Also, there are literally hundreds of pop-culture references to AYBABTU, and listing them all would be massive overkill. Beeblebrox (talk) 01:10, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

But as far as musical references is concerned, there's only a techno (Laziest Men On Mars) and trance (Kalocin) remix and the picture collages using the techno remix. I haven't seen any videos using the trance remix, which I believe should also be notable as it is listed on different sites, not just on Youtube! The Hip-Hop remix SHOULD be notable because it's used in a different style that noone on Youtube has done before (Atleast to my knowledge)! If the techno remix is notable, why not the trance and hip-hop remixes? Do they not merit the same notability as bieng unique? Most of the pop-culture references use the techno remix and not the latter two mentioned. Both SHOULD be listed under the related-media section! DTraveler (talk) 19:14, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Novelty and notability are two different things. Notice that all of the references in the mass media section are to news magazines, websites or TV stations - Wired, WWMT, The Register, Time magazine, CNet. We deliberately don't talk about the musical styles, because they're not the focus of the article, and they're not notable in themselves. If someone wrote an article in a mainstream publication about the different musical styles used in AYB remixes, then sure, it'd be worth a section here. The external link that was there shouldn't have been, incidentally, for the same reason. Orpheus (talk) 22:00, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

So in order for it to be notable, it must be from a reprebable source like a magazine or website other than Youtube, correct? —Preceding unsigned comment added by DTraveler (talkcontribs) 06:25, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

A good starting point is at WP:RS. Orpheus (talk) 18:42, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

I'm confused by the policy at work here. As far as I know, there was a single video -- the dance remix with photo-montage, made by Bad_CRC if other sources are to be believed -- that achieved immense popularity in 2000-2002. I saw it everywhere, and it introduced me to the phrase. Everyone I know saw it, and it introduced them to the phrase. For many people it was their introduction to the entire phenomenon of viral internet video. Yet the article doesn't mention this video at all, relegating it to unspecified "popular culture references" to the original obscure video game. This is incoherent. If a single work is extremely widespread and popular and is the only exposure most people have to a given original work (i.e. the video game), doesn't it merit a wikipedia entry, with information about the author, etc? I had to find the name of the author on some forum somewhere. Wikipedia doesn't do this with other films. The article on T.E. Lawrence has a link and a mention of the film "Lawrence of Arabia", even though there are no doubt many other less popular films that mention T.E. Lawrence. How is this any different? The AYBABTU flash animation was a cultural touchstone for everyone who had an internet connection in 2000, and yet wikipedia seems to know nothing about it. That's truly bizarre, and it makes wikipedia look like a video game trivia site rather than a repository for notable information. Millions of people saw the original AYBABTU flash video -- many more than ever had any other exposure to this video game. It's notable. Why is there no specific information about it? Why do I have to do my research elsewhere to find out about it? --Mrnorwood (talk) 15:34, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

I agree with Mrnorwood, the BAD_CRC video is the original introduction to AYBABTU.
It's misleading not to link to this video. For me, I see a giant missing bit of information in this article without that video.
J_Tom_Moon_79 (talk) 17:31, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Here are a few links where Bad_CRC is mentioned in relation to the All your base video:

- Soulkeeper (talk) 16:20, 29 September 2015 (UTC)


I'm not sure who's watching this, but it seems fairly well maintained due to the "lulz factor" involved with the article subject. Someone with admin tools may want to think about moving some or all of the somewhat intrusive inline wikitext comments into a Wikipedia:Editnotice instead.
V = I * R (talk to Ohms law) 01:02, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

That's an excellent idea. Orpheus (talk) 01:14, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done I left them in, but did create an edit notice page. Template:Editnotices/Page/All your base are belong to us Perhaps the combination of the two will slow down the constant additions of every tiny mention ever made of this. Beeblebrox (talk) 00:48, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for that. I thinned the inline comments out a bit a couple of weeks ago, so they're less intrusive than when the original request was posted. Orpheus (talk) 22:21, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

"Not in citation given"?[edit]

Someone has (cleverly) added "not in citation given" for the translation to be cited. Please fix this, as I'm not sure that the phrase is in proper English... (talk) 07:15, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Google translation[edit]

An ip user decided a few days ago that there should be a machine translation included in the table. I don't understand what this was supposed to accomplish as machine translations are notoriously inaccurate but there is no mention of a translation program in the article. Given that Zero Wing was released in 1991, it's likely a human did the translating. Beeblebrox (talk) 08:50, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Take off every 'zig'[edit]

I'm pretty sure the phrase "Take off every 'zig'" was part of this (and was mentioned in this article in the past). Where has it gone? – gpvos (talk) 20:45, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

where is the animation?[edit]

there was animation here before. you can't rely on wikipedia for anything. Always some purist or vandal or puristvandal messes it up.12:29, 4 May 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk)

That's what I'm saying. I remembered the flash animation and came here to look it up and watch it again. There's only 1 mention of the flash animation, and that's when the article mentions that the wired article mentions it. There is also no link to the original flash. This article contained no new or useful information for me. --Paintblock (talk) 16:08, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Mention in MechQuest tutorial[edit]

There was a mention of the infamous line in the tutorial for MMO mechquest. If you were to click the monitor, the king would eventually say, "The Aliens said, 'All your base are belong to us. You have no chance to survive make your time...'" (talk) 23:27, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Coverage by meme-demystification site Know Your Meme[edit]

Hello everyone,
I tried to add the following text to the header of the article, but user:Orpheus deleted it and has not responded on his Talk Page. I believe his deletion was incorrect; I can hardly think of a more authoritative source for information about a meme than Rocketboom's site. Can I please get your support for inclusion of the following:

Meme-demystification site Know Your Meme published a definitive short documentary video and a summary page about all your base are belong to us on August 15, 2008.[1]

  1. ^ 15 Aug, 2008. Know Your Meme - All your base are belong to us. Rocketboom. Retrieved 2010-09-28.

Thanks & cheers, Tntdj (talk) 23:20, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

I wouldn't support that addition. The text you show above looks simply like an advert for the know your meme site, it doesn't add any actual information to the article for the reader, it simply directs them elsewhere. See WP:EL and WP:RS for more info. Bigger digger (talk) 23:54, 4 October 2010 (UTC)


What sort of pics should be included? When Adobe bought Omniture, they put up a billboard in the style Omniture had been using for their recruiting billboards. This one said "Omniture and Adobe. All your base are belong to us." I took a photograph Small version of Billboard Pic. Would this be of interest due to it being Adobe's billboard? Due to the lovely shade of green? If so, I'll crop it, adjust it, etc., upload it to Commons, and insert it. If not, where would be a better place for it? Lyle (talk) 06:15, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Sources #1 and #2 are the same[edit] I'd suggest merging the two into one reference, or dropping #2 entirely and reattribute to #1, but for #$%&! sake I can't figure out how to renumber sources #3 to #8. Please advise, TiA. - (User. 07:31, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

I've made the change. Note that using the <ref> tag will enable automatic numbering of the refs. Mindmatrix 12:43, 21 March 2011 (UTC)


I'm surprised that the Warcraft III: Reign of Chaos reference is not in this list, as it is an early and influential use of the phrase. The phrase is used as a cheat code for the game to give instant victory to the player in single player mode.

The game was first released July 3, 2002 in the US.

The game and expansion sold 3 and 5 million copies respectively, so there is definitely a lot of exposure there as the cheat codes were released with the game in the back of the manual. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 16:30, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

I would say that while the game was notable, its usage of the phrase as a cheat code might not be. - SudoGhost (talk) 20:45, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Phrase shows up on a tee shirt in the May 11,2011 episode of TV show "Breaking In" C172driver (talk) 01:50, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

This doesn't seem to be notable in any way, and was unsourced. - SudoGhost (talk) 03:25, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Hackers Broaden Their Attacks ~ The Wall Street Journal[edit]

Can we mention the WSJ article from May 31st 2011 Marketplace section which discusses hacking incidents at defense contractor Lockheed Martin and broadcaster PBS. The story title was "Hackers Broaden Their Attacks" by BEN WORTHEN, RUSSELL ADAMS, NATHAN HODGE and EVAN RAMSTAD. The article shows an image of the PBS website message, post attack, with the phrase "ALL YOUR BASE ARE BELONG TO LULZSEC" with a link to Reference an electronic version of the article here: Ascarola (talk) 21:06, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

OK. Synergee (talk) 01:10, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
Yes. Herostratus (talk) 02:13, 30 September 2011 (UTC)


If someone can find a source explaining why the bad guy is called CATS, please add it to the article. --Trovatore (talk) 01:12, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

No luck yet, but looking... FYI ReginaldTQ (talk) 20:26, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

A good source for information[edit] I had this link in the article over four years ago. Not sure when it was removed. It does give a lot of valid information. Dream Focus 18:16, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Very likely because it is not a reliable source. —Preceding signed comment added by MythSearchertalk 11:24, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

List of Cultural References?[edit]

I noticed on the edit page that occurrences that are not covered by the media should be 'placed in the article List of cultural references to "All your base are belong to us"'. However, that article is nowhere to be found, other than a link on this talk page. Should a new page be created for this?

I really wanted to add a Pandora error message, in which they refer to a line of this. Apparently it's an out-of-sync like error sent out by Pandora to its desktop clients. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 8vdude8 (talkcontribs) 13:01, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

More accurate English translation[edit]

Where did these translations come from? They sound suspiciously like a case of WP:NOR. Primogen (talk) 19:43, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

They look basically made up to me, and not very well - I would phrase about half of them differently. I think the whole table should be removed, personally. Orpheus (talk) 15:27, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
I removed it. I agree it looks like nonsense. Someone trying to be helpful, simple mistake I'm sure. Dream Focus 22:16, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
It was restored, but I removed it again, because unless there's a reliable source that can verify this, I think per WP:BURDEN and WP:OR these translations don't belong. - SudoGhost 09:00, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
  • (edit conflict) I've reverted the removal for various reasons. First, translations aren't considered OR because the verifiability policy explicitly allows for them at WP:NOENG (sure a reliable source would be better and should be used if available, but it's not mandatory). Second, the table has been widely debated at this very talk page, the current article contains the consensual version after many edit revisions. Third, even if it was OR only the "More accurate English translation" should be removed, not the whole table. Please try to follow the explicit instructions explaining the consensus that were included with the table the next time, and start an RfC if you want to change previous consensus. Thanks - Diego (talk) 09:01, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
  • I've reverted to the stable version once again, but won't edit war anymore if you decide to remove it against WP:NOENG. If this direct statement by policy is not enough to keep the translation, we will go through a request for comments. Diego (talk) 09:07, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
Can you provide a link to this previous consensus? What I'm seeing is a discussion about the removal of entirety of the translation table, not the "more accurate" section specifically. A recent specific discussion is not overridden by a more generalized discussion from three years ago. - SudoGhost 09:15, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
This is the first time a consensual translation was provided, made directly from the primary source. Other discussions have been made and are available in the archives about the table as a whole and the translations in particular; they arrived largely to the table we have now, which was trimmed to just a few sentences for fair use. Slight revisions to the translations have been made over time. See also here for what seems to be the last consensual discussion. Diego (talk) 10:10, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
After reading that, I'm against having it at all. There are many different ways to translate Japanese, and no one seems to agree on how it should be done, giving totally different meanings to things. Dream Focus 10:21, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
  • Four people have stated it should be removed, one person wants it in. You don't need a "request for comment" when you have enough people discussing it here on the talk page. If someone who speaks Japanese can confirm what a literally translation is, I have no objection towards it being in the article, just not at the top. Surely with something like this so popular online, a reliable source has published an accurate translation that could be used as a reference. Dream Focus 09:25, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
  • Please read the WP:Original research policy mentioned as a reason for deleting the table and see what it says about translations. Wikipedia-wide consensus can't be trumped by local consensus. (We really should write a F.A.Q. about this table). Diego (talk) 09:51, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
  • It is original research since no one could agree on how to translate the Japanese, you having to guess the emotion and the meaning of words in that confusing language. Different interpretations give totally different meanings. Dream Focus 10:21, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
"Different interpretations with different meanings" calls for a revision of the translation, but it still doesn't make it original research because OR says it doesn't deal with translations; we have both the primary source and the japanese text, so every reader can try to verify the content by themselves.
Given that there's still no consensus for the change I will continue the process of dispute resolution; wider attention will help to achieve a most accurate translation, or decide once for all a strong consensus about the table. (You of all people shouldn't be remembered that consensus is not decided by the number of votes but by the strength of arguments - since you are a member of the WP:ARS and participate at AfD discussions you're well versed with the consensus building process). Diego (talk) 11:21, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── I've listed the discussion at all the Wikiprojects interested in the topic, as suggested by Wikipedia:Request for comment#Before requesting comment. Diego (talk)

You posted at three wikiprojects. [1] How does this effect the animation wikiproject? Internet culture is the only wikiproject involved and perhaps the video game wikiproject. We already link to the thing in the article at so people can view it there. I'm against the "Correct English translation" thing, since different translators disagree on what the original thing said, as I mentioned already. Dream Focus 13:06, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
I posted at the three Wikiprojects because all three have marked this article of interest to them. As a reader that found the original meaning of the Japanese sentences by reading this articles, I assure you that it provides some value; you're denying to all readers that come behind you the chance to assess by themselves the quality evaluation you made above for yourself (the Wikiquote box doesn't provide any hint that a literal translation is included there, and it could be deleted anytime). I can't see how providing no translation at all is an improvement and a benefit to readers, compared to providing an approximate one even if its accuracy may be questionable. Diego (talk) 15:34, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
Does reading that someone aid in understanding this better? And better no information than wrong information. We strive for accuracy here. Dream Focus 22:56, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
It helped me. I had no clue what "You have no chance to survive make your time" and "What you say!!" meant before reading this Wikipedia article. I don't think the translations were wrong; and every translation by their nature will have several possibilities and some a degree of interpretation, even machine-made ones (see Hofstadter's Le Ton beau de Marot for a thorough anaylisis of translations - a perfect one is impossible, but that doesn't mean they are not useful; only that we should decide which criteria are more important for the readers of this article to understand the original text). Diego (talk) 08:28, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
  • 3rd Party comment - First of all, it's hard to know what we're talking about without being able to see it, so for other late-comers like me, here is what the table looks like when it's part of the article. But as far as the translation table is concerned,...
    I think it's clear that the poor English of the expression is a large part of what it is. Having both the original Japanese and the original English translation are very helpful to illustrate the exact linguistic evolution of the phrase. For this reason I'm against removing the Japanese script and the original English. The "more accurate English version" may not violate WP:OR, but it does express an individual's view of the text and as such it may violate WP:NPOV - especially as it currently seems to be challenged. The structure of the text may fit a table best, but it's not necessary either, so if consensus moves to blockquote it or whatever then that's fine. The only thing that I will say is that in my view the original Japanese script and the original English translation are helpful to a full understanding of the topic and should appear in the article. -Thibbs (talk) 01:07, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
    • Thanks for bringing this discussion to WT:VG's attention. I wouldn't have seen it otherwise. I'm going to agree with Thibbs. Unless there's a copyright concern, I don't think it's a problem to include some snippets of the original Japanese and English scripts. I think the current table falls under Fair Use, so that's fine. However, I don't think WP:NOENG really applies here. If you follow the first bullet point, it would suggest providing the original Japanese and official English translation. The second bullet point doesn't apply at all here, since you're not using the text as a citation. Obviously there is contention over what an "acceptable" better translation would be. To be perfectly honest, I don't think a "more accurate" translation would be terribly beneficial to the article at all. Most readers can get a decent sense of the meaning, even from the lulzy official translation and they can machine translate the Japanese if they so desire. In sum, remove the "better" translation, but having a table with official Japanese and English might be helpful. Axem Titanium (talk) 06:14, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
The Google translation for "せいぜい残り少ない命を、大切にしたまえ・・・・。" is "Shitamae a chance to survive make your best · · · ·". I still found "Treasure what little time remains of your lives" or "Cherish what remains of your lives" or even the first version "Struggle! For what good it will do to your soon to be destroyed lives" better translations and expected content in an article in which the main topic are bad translations.Diego (talk) 08:46, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
    • Thank you for your comments. Thibbs, can you elaborate in which way you think the available direct translations could be a violation of WP:NPOV, and if you fell that there's a way in which they could be improved to avoid the problem? I've asked help at Wikipedia talk:Pages needing translation into English to see wether someone experienced with translations made by editos can inform us of how this is usually solved at other articles. Diego (talk) 08:20, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
      • NPOV asks editors to "Avoid stating opinions as facts". The truth of the matter is that apart from an inelegant literal translation like Google Translate tries to perform, a proper "poetic" translation as we see in the table requires the use of editorial opinion when it comes to word choice. The table is vague on the question of whether the improved translation is "A more accurate English translation" or if it is "The more accurate English translation". Although it is obvious to anyone who has tried their hand at translating that a definitive translation is impossible and that an authorized translation is the best anyone can hope for, this fact may not be common knowledge to the general public. So if an improved translation is to be part of the final article, some of the following would be worth considering:
        1. Change the table to say "A more accurate English translation" and include disclaimers that this is not an authorized translation
        2. Use an agree-upon consensus-based translation (possibly with the help of "WP:Pages needing translation into English") and use IAR to dodge WP:V in this limited case. Be prepared to alter the text if consensus changes or to add a different "more accurate English translation" if a significant competing view emerges.
        3. It must be considered a stop-gap measure and that as soon as an RS emerges its "reliable" translation will be used instead.
      • I'm not dead-set against including the "more accurate translation", since word-choice in an article really should fall under editorial discretion like it does with the English usage, but if the item cannot be sourced except to WP editors, then I think some combination of consensus and IAR will have to be the basis for its inclusion. -Thibbs (talk) 14:13, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
        • I agree with your caveats since they are common sense- include a translation defined by consensus and update the wording if consensus changes. This was the situation with the existing translation and how it was created. WP:NOENG is clear that we should use a sourced translation if available, but nobody has found it in years and in that case the rules allow us to create one; I don't think there's a need to ignore all rules nor that this case is exceptional. Diego (talk) 22:37, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
          • Yeah that's true I guess. I've been regarding the text as the object of the reporting rather than as the source itself, but if we consider the text from the Japanese game as the source then an English translation is warranted without further concern for WP:V. I agree that NOENG covers it as long as we're careful to avoid the implication that this is somehow the only or the official way to translate the original Japanese. -Thibbs (talk) 15:20, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Comments on the translation[edit]

Original script Original English translation Wikipedians-made English translation
機関士:何者かによって、爆発物が仕掛けられたようです。 Mechanic: Somebody set up us the bomb. Engineer: An unknown assailant has planted a bomb!
通信士:メインスクリーンにビジョンが来ます。 Operator: Main screen turn on. Radio Operator: Video is being routed to the main screen.
CATS:連邦政府軍のご協力により、君達の基地は、全てCATSがいただいた。 CATS: All your base are belong to us. CATS: With the help of Federation Forces, all your bases have been taken over by us.
CATS:せいぜい残り少ない命を、大切にしたまえ・・・・。 CATS: You have no chance to survive make your time. CATS: Treasure what little time remains of your lives.
艦長:我々の未来に希望を・・・ Captain: For great justice. Captain: Let's hope for our future...

Hi! I came here after I saw a message at the WikiProject:Japan's talk page. I'm a native ja speaker. The translation is correct, I'm not sure if it's natural en though. As for the first line, the original ja is the passive. Oda Mari (talk) 15:04, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

I've copied above the most recent version of the translation. Is this the same one you read from the history page? Diego (talk) 22:29, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
Yes, it is. Strictly speaking, the first line uses "assailant", but 何者(か) is just "somebody" or "an unknown person". 爆発物 is "an explosive substance" or "explosives", not a bomb. Bomb is 爆弾. As for the fourth line, the object is "life", not "time". The original ja is "Treasure your running-out life" or "Treasure your soon-to-end life". Oda Mari (talk) 06:11, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
Saw your request... I say remove it, looks super shady. Can anyone verify translation? THX ReginaldTQ (talk) 13:53, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Hello, I also received a request to verify. I am a native speaker of both languages and will make my own translation from which you may judge the above translation for yourself.

  1. It appears that an unknown party has planted an explosive.
  2. We are getting video on the main screen (lit. a visual is coming on the main screen)
  3. With the the cooperation of Federation forces, all of your bases have been taken by us (lit. CATS has received/taken all of your bases)
  4. Treasure what little remains of your lives
  5. Let there be hope for our future (lit. to our future, hope.)

I used let there be (like fiat); however, the last line takes on slightly different meaning with context. For example, it could be a proclamation as I have translated it, but, in the given context, it is more like a prayer or wish (please give hope for our futures). The closest literal translation I can think of is as I have written it. Rufe (talk) 04:41, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

If we put the translation, does it not make sense to include the full Japanese text as taken from ? Adding just the second to last line removes the ambiguity from the last line making it
  • I ask of you, ZIG [units]
  • To our future, [restore] hope...
I should point out that the translation there is probably original work by another wikipedian.

Rufe (talk) 20:26, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Japanese-to-English translation[edit]

Reviewing the situation as a way to advance discussion:

  • There were doubts about the neutrality of a translation that is created by Wikipedia editors.
  • We have some editors stating their concerns about the accuracy of the available translations directly from the Japanese source.
  • There are also some worries from the availability of several alternate translations for each sentence.

In the discussion we analyzed the relevant policies and guidelines, which in any case forbid a Wikipedia-made translation and even encourages it above machine-made ones (the alternative that Axem Titanium suggested for readers).And I strongly suspect that Google Translate is using the Wikipedia-provided translation for these sentences, making this course of action WP:CIRCULAR.

We have attracted the attention of a native Japanese speaker who has checked that the meaning of the translations is accurate. Also, Thibbs has proposed some check-list points that we could use to ensure that Neutrality policy is met, and a way to avoid the problem of several translations - just decide on one and use it for the article, but make it clear that it's open to further discussion.

I see this as rough consensus to recover the translations into the article, adding enough caveats to warn readers on the nature of the translations and pointing them to the way they were made. This consensus also suggest keeping working on the translations to decide some criteria by which they can be improved and eventually replaced with a better version, created through a clear process. I for one think we should decide which tone should be used for the translation, as we can choose between a more literal translation that is close to the original words (such as "Treasure your running-out life"), or a more loose one that nonetheless provides a more natural tone closer to the original intent of the sentences ("Treasure what little time remains of your lives").

So, can we re-add the table with the modifications suggested by Thibbs and start this discussion process, or are there any more reasons against the inclusion of the translations? Diego (talk) 19:56, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

I added some info aboveRufe (talk) 04:42, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Errata/Suggestions for Japanese Translation[edit]

I would like to suggest in the third line we might want to change "help" to "cooperation". I am unsure of the context (if "Federation forces" refers to a third party or the player's forces), but cooperation is a translation of the Japanese that could apply to both cases.

Also, I switched the literal and looser translations for the first line. A study of the Japanese makes it clear that the ambiguous language is the more literal translation

Rufe (talk) 06:55, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your work. I've edited that sentence following your suggestion. Diego (talk) 10:14, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

See also English As She Is Spoke[edit]

I am considering adding English As She Is Spoke to the "See also" section, as a similar stereotype of broken English. --Boson (talk) 15:49, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Please do it, and include an explanation of that relation per WP:SEEALSO. The See also section often includes serendipious and loosely related articles when the section is not too long, and the guideline allows for "peripherally relevant" links. Diego (talk) 16:06, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

New Note[edit]

Hi, not sure how to edit this; I did come across a pop-culture reference to AYBABTU.

There's a music radio station in Boston that has been "hacked" by aliens or something. lol If you go to and then click on the now playing thing, it pulls up the radio player page and its like some kind of weird alien rap music and they just keep singing all your base. it's a remix of the video game

what's weird is its one of those Jesus rock stations

anyway I'll leave this to you guys to figure out what to do with [1] — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:42, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

not sure there is anything to do with that, but thx ReginaldTQ (talk) 13:51, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

References in mass media and elsewhere[edit]

Song "My Feelings for You" by DJ Avicii[edit]

On December 13, 2010, the song "My Feelings for You" by DJs Avicii and Sebastien Drums was released. Its music video makes reference to this citation stating "All your feelings are belong to us...".[2]

  1. ^
  2. ^ My Feelings for You on MAXUMI
Any objections? Best regards, Hippo99 (talk) 03:33, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Futurama's Anthology of Interest II[edit]

In episode eighteen of the third season of Futurama called Anthology of Interest II, the sequence entitled "Raiders of the Lost Arcade" shows many video game references, including a sequence where 'villains (Lrrr, Donkey Kong, a Berzerk robot, BurgerTime's Mr. Egg and Q*bert) exit the landed ship, one character says the phrase "All your base are belong to us."' --Nay1989 (talk) 09:12, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

Advertising Industry[edit]

After major advertising holding companies Publicis Groupe and Omnicom Group announced in July 2013 they would merge, a parody Twitter handle was created: PublicisOmnicom. As of July 29, 2013, the profile picture depicted Publicis CEO Maurice Levy's head on CATS's body. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrcarmine (talkcontribs) 17:01, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Song "All Your Base Are Belong To Us" by Kenji Yamazaki[edit]

The title of this song which appears on the Soundtrack for the Super Famicom game "Appleseed : Oracles of Prometheus" is historically, the first mention of the phrase to date. The game was released in August 1994. Source: internal track listing of Appleseed: Prometheus no Shintaku or [1] Shadako (talk) 02:37, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

List of cultural references was deleted[edit]

The article List of cultural references to "All your base are belong to us" was deleted in 2007. Isn't it absurd that the section "References in mass media and elsewhere" instructs to place removed entries there? Diego (talk) 19:09, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

You guys base, CATS has taken all.[edit]

And that's how Google Translate currently renders 君達の基地は、全てCATSがいただいた. LOL (talk) 04:39, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Several translations/interpretations[edit]

I've reverted a repeated attempt by an IP user to change the translation to include alternative wordings within slashes. I understand the desire to have various options for each translation, but the approach to put all the different versions in the same place just makes the test unreadable.

Also the current text was arrived to by consensus and help by many different editors trying to provide an accurate, direct translation. Maybe the alternatives could be placed as footnotes or below the table, but placing them all mangled within the text is not an improvement. Diego (talk) 21:50, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Yes I agree that listing everything will make it unreadable. To make the article so literal and including every translation kind of ruins the spirit of why it's funny. The saying is interesting to people because it's a 'miss' right? Synergee (talk) 06:28, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

This needs a better translation:[edit]

Original script Original English translation Wikipedians-made English translation CATS:せいぜい残り少ない命を、大切にしたまえ・・・・。 CATS: You have no chance to survive make your time. CATS: Treasure what little time remains in your lives.

The actual translation is not fully correct. It needs to be fixed. (talk · contribs · WHOIS)

Can you please explain how it is not correct, and do you have some suggestions on how to translate it? Diego (talk) 09:16, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

I would say it would be something like: "Make sure you spend the rest of your lifetime, meaningful." Well, then again, let's just put both. >_> (talk · contribs · WHOIS)

Plants vs Zombies[edit]

Isn't there a mention in PvZ with the puzzle level "All your brainz r belong to us"? Interest=phine (talk) 04:49, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

WP April 1 suggestion[edit]

A Pacman-type game routine which 'consumes' areas of the MP with tbe message on completion 'All your edit are belong to us.' (and which can be readily 'turned off' after being seen once). (talk) 17:51, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

"All your data are belong to us"[edit]

I edited the caption on this image to try to sound more neutral. The way it was seemed irrelevant and incitant. Anyone else have any thoughts? Skolithos (talk) 09:37, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Elon Musk: "All our patent are belong to you"[edit]

I'm not sure where to find a RS making the connection, though (even though the reference is obvious). (talk) 00:16, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Tesla put a picture of the meme on their ex-patent wall:
Also, the original announcement with this title:
I think it can't be any clearer than that Caroliano (talk) 16:54, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
CNN also made the connection, although the meme is only referenced in the title, which in turn is directly from Tesla. Supernerd11 Firemind ^_^ Pokedex 01:21, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
I added two references which make the connection in their articles. [2] Dream Focus 20:19, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
Linking those to the article violates WP:SYNTH. Orpheus (talk) 19:26, 2 August 2015 (UTC)
Its not synthesis if the article specifically says this. As for your revert [3] you claim those are "Not notable media references". Really? Mashable "the site has over 43 million visits per month, as of 2015". How is it not a notable media? Dream Focus 19:54, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

CATS: doesn't this sound like a "lolcats" subtitle?[edit]

Would this GIF be famous if the CATS: bit wasn't there? The article doesn't seem to suggest that it does. Or did the "lolcats" subtitle take its form (of skewed English) from this GIF?-- (talk) 03:29, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

The whole thing significantly predates the common lolcat.©Geni (talk) 12:39, 23 May 2015 (UTC)


What about the Combichrist lyrics? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 23:22, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

Stern pinball machine AYBABTU easter egg[edit]

Some Stern pinball machines are having the "All your base are belong to us" easter egg, which is accessible in attract mode. Here's example with High Roller Casino(done via PinMAME, should be possible on real unit as well): What do you think about it?

Titanic2 (talk) 15:27, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

Unfortunately we can't mention the easter egg without a link to a reliable source that describes it, such as a magazine, newspaper or book. According to Wikipedia guidelines, trivia facts about a topic needs to be referenced to reputable writers, who explain how and why that particular easter egg is relevant. The mentions in media included in the article all have such coverage. Diego (talk) 13:39, 3 August 2015 (UTC)