Talk:All your base are belong to us

Archived

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 google translated it and it was gone wrong

Google Translation
Engineer: It seems that an explosive was set up by someone.
Correspondent: Vision comes to the main screen.
CATS: Thanks to the cooperation of the federal army, all of your bases are CATS.
CATS: At the very least, cherish the few remaining lives ...
Captain: Enjoy. ZIG! !
Captain: Hope for our future ...

-- 05:19, 9 September 2019‎ 109.201.38.56

"EDM remix"

Second paragraph: "A music video accompanied by an EDM remix of the clip..."

I submit that the term EDM is anachronistic - if memory serves correctly, at the time such a track was typically referred to as a "techno remix."

The EDM article seems to lend credence to my recollection: "By the early 2010s, the term "electronic dance music" and the initialism "EDM" was being pushed by the American music industry and music press in an effort to rebrand American rave culture. Despite the industry's attempt to create a specific EDM brand, the acronym remains in use as an umbrella term for multiple genres, including dance-pop, house, techno, electro and trance, as well as their respective subgenres, which all predate the acronym." Foolishgrunt (talk) 05:27, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Where is the correct version?

I expected to find also the correct version: "All your bases belong to us." 85.193.255.45 (talk) 18:33, 22 September 2025 (UTC)

"How are you gentlemen" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect How are you gentlemen has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 October 29 § How are you gentlemen until a consensus is reached. consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 12:09, 29 October 2025 (UTC)

"«All your base are belong to us»" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect «All your base are belong to us» has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 October 29 § «All your base are belong to us» until a consensus is reached. consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 12:13, 29 October 2025 (UTC)

"What happen?" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect What happen? has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 October 29 § What happen? until a consensus is reached. consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 12:15, 29 October 2025 (UTC)

"Your base" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Your base has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 October 29 § Your base until a consensus is reached. consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 12:21, 29 October 2025 (UTC)

"Terrible secret of space" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Terrible secret of space has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 January 29 § Terrible secret of space until a consensus is reached. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 23:16, 29 January 2026 (UTC)

"How nice to meet you gentleman !!" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect How nice to meet you gentleman !! has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 February 9 § How nice to meet you gentleman !! until a consensus is reached. consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 11:26, 9 February 2026 (UTC)

Proper English translation that also takes into account the register of the original Japanese

The source at https://legendsoflocalization.com/lets-take-a-peek-at-zero-wings-all-your-base-translation/ for the "Basic English translation" is now a dead link. The issues with those translations is that they fail to take into account the registers and levels of speech that the Japanese script uses. Translating the Japanese directly into English strips the intent that the Japanese script has.

Here is the properly translated English that takes into account the Japanese registers of select lines featured in the main article.

Japanese	English translation in the main article	Proper English translation	Translation notes
機関士：何者かによって、爆発物が仕掛けられたようです。	Engineer: It appears someone has planted explosives.	Engineer: Reports indicate someone planted explosives aboard.	The original Japanese line uses the ようです construct. In Japanese, people never express anything that's not their own direct observation as such. This even includes military protocol. Translating ようです as "it seems that" or "it appears that" may be technically accurate, but in the context of military protocol, it makes the speakers come off as unsure or wishy washy. In Western military contexts, military members never say things like "it seems that the enemy is closing in". It is "scans show that the enemy is closing in." The equivalent English translation used that follows the intent of the Japanese line and fits Western military contexts is "reports indicate" to convey that the Mechanic/Engineer is delivering a situation report synthesized from second-hand information.
通信士：メインスクリーンにビジョンが来ます。	Communications Operator: Incoming visual on the main screen.	Communications operator: Visual confirmed on the main screen.	The Japanese line's use of メインスクリーン (main screen) and ビジョン (vision) is an example of wasei-eigo, commonly used in Japanese sci-fi writing to make technology seem futuristic and somewhat foreign to the Japanese audience. The literal English translation of the Japanese line is "A visual is coming to the main screen." The more accurate English translation takes Japanese line's formal register and renders it as a military protocol situation report, delivered clipped and with brevity.
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: With the help of Federation government forces, CATS has taken all of your bases.	CATS: With the gracious support of the Federation Government forces, CATS has humbly received all of your bases.	CATS' use of ご in front of 協力 elevates the support that the Federation gave him. This is reflected in the more accurate English translation as "gracious support." Conversely, his use of 君達 (kimitachi, "you all" / "you lot") to address the Captain is condescending and patronizing. いただくis kenjougo AKA humble language. It is the humble verb form of "to receive," so it is reflected in the English translation as "humbly received all your bases." Additionally, translating 協力 as "support" fits the intended meaning better than "help" or "cooperation," as "support" communicates that the Federation was forced to work with CATS and hand the bases over to him.
艦長：我々の未来に希望を・・・	Captain: May there be hope for our future...	Captain: For the hope in our future...	The Japanese line is a purposeful sentence fragment. Ending with を implies that 我々の未来に希望 will take the action of whatever verb comes after. With Zero Wing being a video game, by omitting the verb, the Japanese script is indirectly calling upon the player to supply the action.

The current translation in the article is sourced from Clyde Mandelin’s Legends of Localization. However, in that exact same article, Mandelin explicitly states:

"The basic translation I’ve provided needs some polishing work, but it shows what the original script was going for… and possibly shows how the official translation wound up the way it did."

Because of this, the current translation is incomplete and factually inaccurate. I understand the need to secure a "Verifiable Source," but willfully ignoring the paragraph immediately following the translation table where Mandelin makes an explicit disclaimer that his translations are unpolished is an act of supreme editorial negligence. EMRA0527 (talk) 18:56, 27 March 2026 (UTC)

We still need a verifiable source, we can't just rely on original research here. And accusing editors of "supreme editorial negligence" is going a bit too far. Harryhenry1 (talk) 07:28, 29 March 2026 (UTC)

I take back the phrase 'supreme editorial negligence.' That goes against WP:CIVIL.

But my core concern regarding WP:V remains: we are currently misrepresenting our primary verifiable source. Clyde Mandelin explicitly states in the cited article that his translation is 'basic,' 'needs polishing work,' and only serves to show 'what the original script was going for' mechanically. By presenting his self-described rough draft as the definitive encyclopedic translation, we are overriding the author's own disclaimer. We shouldn't enshrine a literal dictionary-scrape when the cited expert specifically warned us it was an unfinished draft. Polishing it according to standard linguistic rules is the fulfillment of the source's intent, not the invention of new material.

You mentioned that we cannot rely on original research. Applying standard, documented Japanese grammatical rules is basic linguistic literacy. Clyde Mandelin translating the humble verb いただいた into "taken" is what actually constitutes original research, actively ignoring a hard-coded sociolinguistic marker. いただく does not mean "to take." It means "to humbly receive." That is a documented, dictionary-verifiable, linguistic fact. Similarly, the use of ようです is a verifiable and factual epistemic marker indicating secondhand information, not a direct observation. The scene in the game's intro is on board a space vessel with a military crew. That is a verifiable fact, not original research. In Western military protocol, translating this as "it appears" comes across as hesitant. That is why the intent of relaying secondhand observation is rendered as "reports indicate." Translation is more than just swapping one word with another. The intent has to be translated as well.

I am not inventing lore or introducing original research. I am applying standard, factual, and verifiable Japanese sociolinguistics (Keigo and epistemic modality) to polish the text, fulfilling the exact requirement the cited source stated was missing. EMRA0527 (talk) 16:40, 29 March 2026 (UTC)

Just to be clear, what Wikipedia defines as original research (as outlined at WP:OR) isn't speculation from the sources used, but research from users without a source backing them up. That's what I mean by the site not relying on original research. It's still research going beyond the sources used, no matter how correct you think you are. Harryhenry1 (talk) 04:04, 30 March 2026 (UTC)

If the strict enforcement of WP:OR mandates that Wikipedia must host an explicitly unfinished, contextually inaccurate rough draft solely because it possesses a secondary citation, I will no longer contest it.

I have documented the objective sociolinguistic errors—specifically regarding kenjougo and epistemic modality—on this Talk page for the archival record. Because the current policy framework prioritizes procedural verification over factual linguistic accuracy, I am officially disengaging from this article. I leave this record for future editors who may eventually acquire the necessary published literature to correct these documented localization failures. EMRA0527 (talk) 06:31, 30 March 2026 (UTC)