Talk:Final Fantasy VII: Advent Children

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Good article Final Fantasy VII: Advent Children has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Anime and manga (Rated GA-class, Low-importance)
Wikipe-tan good article.png This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anime and manga, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of anime and manga related articles 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.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-class on the assessment scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
WikiProject Film (Rated GA-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Japanese cinema task force.
WikiProject Square Enix (Rated GA-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Square Enix, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Square Enix-related merchandise and 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.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Video games (Rated GA-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.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Animation / Films / Computer (Rated GA-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.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Not Eligible for Anime/Manga Portal..[edit]

Under Anime/Manga Portal guidelines, this article is not eligible to be included in this category. final fantasy is a video game series which spawned 2 movies, 2 Ova and 1 Anime series. WIthout the video game franchise however, FInal Fantasy would have no grounds to be an ANime Franchise, and to be quite frank, wouldnt' exist at all. Please review either the rules of ANime/Manga Portal, or remove this article from the category.

GA failed, notes for improvement[edit]

  • The plot section is completely unsourced, as is much of the article, this must be resolved
  • The tie in's section is too long, it goes off the point.

On the good side.

  • The article is neutral, stable and has a good set of pictures.

Sourcing and the proportionality of the article are the main concerns. Get everything sourced and stick to the point. Realist2 (talk) 05:55, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

  • While I have not edited this article, I will tell you that plot sections do not need to be sourced. Nabudis Shadow (talk) 01:43, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

What the hell is up with the promotion section?[edit]

First off, it's biased. Second off, it's written as if the movie has not come out yet.

"fans of the popular game have wondered if the movie will be a stunning success or a miserable failure." - And this is noteworthy because?

"Not only did Square-Enix have to live up to the status of Final Fantasy VII" - biased.

"Square-Enix are planning various promotions for AC in Japan in the run up to its September release. . . .(and everything after this)." - so they're planning for a past release?

When the hell was this article last edited? Tlonmaster (talk) 05:29, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

"Not only did Square-Enix have to live up to the status of Final Fantasy VII" - biased.
Nonsense. FFVII is one of the highest-selling video games in history and one of the most enduring brands in video gaming. It has a very, very high status of popularity for its sequel to live up to, and there's nothing biased about noting that objective fact. Kasreyn (talk) 14:46, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Merge the Last Order featurette[edit]

I believe the article for this small featurette should be merged here because it fails WP:N: no distinct release than in FFVII AC, and no extensive coverage in independent sources. Kariteh (talk) 08:42, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

If you've checked, then go for it :) Judgesurreal777 (talk) 15:54, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
Do you mind waiting a bit? I've tried getting more information, and I just want to see what I can dig up. I understand the merging, and if nothing can help the article, then fine, but I'd like to see what can be accomplished with it first.WhiteArcticWolf (talk) 21:16, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, don't worry. There's no dead line :) Good luck though, you'll need it. Kariteh (talk) 21:48, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
Thank you! I have added 7 internet refs, but have referenced 14 lines of information in all. Considering the state of Last Order and the limited information about it, I think it's a pretty good start.WhiteArcticWolf (talk) 22:38, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
It now as 20 lines of referenced material, 14 different souces in all, and complete with a small production section and release information. It still needs a logo picture as the one it has now isn't working, but I'm not good at uploading pictures. I plan to get a few more references from the Reunion Files and Ultimanias, which apparently contain some production notes, if I can find someone who has them and get a few quotes from the OVA itself. Even still, it has more references and information than Before Crisis and a few articles such as Yuna (Final Fantasy), which is at B-Class. All in all, can it be kept? WhiteArcticWolf (talk) 20:57, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
The article needs more information, especially reception information. If we don't count the voice actor table (which is trivial), I don't see why the current information can't be integrated in the main Final Fantasy VII Advent Children instead of being spread out in a separate article. Kariteh (talk) 09:12, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
I can probably find how many copies of the Limited Edition Advent Children DVDs sold, but I don't think there has been a official review of it. I'd have to check the Japanese sites and that may take a bit because of my inability to speak/read it. But I'll try. Thanks for your help! WhiteArcticWolf (talk) 12:09, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
Just popping back in to say that I am almost positive I will buy the Reunion files; it's bilingual, so I don't have to translate, and contains a pretty nice section on Last Order development. Also, with the Blu Ray Advent Children Complete coming out, I think it's possible that Last Order may be added to it; keeping my hopes up there. WhiteArcticWolf (talk) 12:36, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

No talk of Reno/Rude in cast?[edit]

there is no details about them, lkike who played them or anything. just saying Suppakid (talk) 19:03, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Beginning of Advent Children and ending of Final Fantasy VII[edit]

I don't know if i am correct but i am sure i saw a different date on the ending of the original final fantasy game, where Red XIII is shown running up a cliff with two other creatures, to overlook the ruins of Midgar. The date shown there was different than the one in the movie no? --Silence1999 (talk) 22:04, 1 December 2008 (UTC)Silence1999

U mean the red XIII running thing? IN the original game, it says 500 years later. And in advet childen, after that, it says "498 years before" and that means Advent Children takes place 2 years after the events of FFVII. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zack fair 007 (talkcontribs)

That explains why midgar is covered in vegetation and in the present its a complete desert.Haseo445 (talk) 16:41, 22 January 2009 (UTC)


Under languages, it says "English (International)". This makes it sound as if there was only a Japanese dub, and an English dub for the rest of the world, doesn't it? What about all the other dubs? Wouldn't it be better to just point out the original language? (talk) 16:34, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, you're right. I've changed it now. The Prince (talk) 18:50, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

So why does it say "English" again? The movie's language is Japanese only. Dubs aren't usually listed for other movies here on Wikipedia, so why is it for Advent Children? And why not list the other dubs as well? Also, under "Country" it says "United States". Again, isn't that just for the country of origin? In that case, the USA shouldn't be listed there. (talk) 19:06, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

It should be English because if I remember correctly the Japanese producers specifically chose the English voice cast as they also used the Voice's in many of there other products (Kingdom Hearts II, Dirge of Cerberus: Final Fantasy VII, Crisis Core: Final Fantasy VII, Kingdom Hearts Re:Chain of memories, Dissidia Final Fantasy, Dissidia 012 Final Fantasy) so the Language just being Japanese is an utter fallacy as they obviously are planed thease VA's and they have worked... for the most part (Mena Suvari...) (talk) 07:24, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

The voice actors weren't actually chosen by the Japanese. And even if they did, it's irrelevant. The point language is only meant for the languages that appear in the original version of the movie, which is Japanese only. (talk) 23:05, 17 October 2011 (UTC)


shouldn't we add Zack in the character list as well? i mean he made brief appearances in a form of a Wolf a few times (1st time near his buster sword, 2nd time near the pond of the forgotten city and 3rd time with with cloud and Aerith on a field of flowers and cloud lying on them) and in two scenes Zack was shown in cloud's memory and in the last moments of the movie.

i think we should add Zack as a character even though he didn't give much of a role.Haseo445 (talk) 16:30, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

First of all, that wasn't Zack; the wolf represents Cloud's status as a "lone wolf", as well as his regrets/guilt. As for him getting his own bit...It depends. In ACC, he actually seems to have a larger role, at least appearing in a larger flashback. So, we'll see. If he has a larger speaking role, I don't see why not. WhiteArcticWolf (talk) 22:16, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

How could he represent the "lone wolf" it made sense that it was Zack represented the wolf. in the third scene with the wolf, he was with Aerith(representing flowers). Cloud: mother?

Aerith: again? why is everyone calling me there mother? (kadaj called aerith mother when she was calling him to the lifestream)

Zack: they must be fond of you.

out of all the times he was talking through the lifestream, they only showed a field of flowers when cloud was talking with Aerith, but when the field of flowers showed a wolf as well, that's when Zack started talking to cloud.

it makes no sense for it to represent a lone wolf while him talking to Aerith and Zack and Cloud accepting that he is not alone.Haseo445 (talk) 15:33, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Uh, no, the wolf represents Cloud being a lone wolf because throughout the entire movie Cloud felt he was alone and kept himself from others. It was a manifestation of his regrets, which is why it appears in places that mean something to him; Zack's grave, the Forgotten City, and Aerith's church (after Tifa was beaten). If you don't believe me, there's proof. Nomura explained in both an Advent Children Japanese commentary and in the Reunion Files what the wolf means. WhiteArcticWolf (talk) 20:14, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

ok, i looked up all the articles and interviews relating to advent children and i watched the commentary of advent children twice, and i did not find any information on the wolf.

also the wolf appeared when cloud was thinking of others and when he realized something.

also the wolf came up when he was talking with aerith and Zack, (somewhere within his mind) and he did not feel any regret at the time.

but whatever, ill just take this anyways. its not like i need to know what the wolf trully means —Preceding unsigned comment added by Haseo445 (talkcontribs) 15:36, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

lol. Nomura kind of explained it.
Q. What is that wolf that appears several times during the film?
A. On the Japanese DVD's director commentary, and in the Advent Children Reunion Files book, Nomura said it's a symbol of Cloud's guilt. He blames himself for lots of things that aren't his fault. For instance: Zack's death, Aerith's death, and Tifa getting beat up while Marlene was kidnapped. Therefore, the wolf appears in places associated with these things.
It's also part of Cloud's theme in the film. There's lots of wolf trinkets on his clothing, and his motorcycle, Fenrir, is named after a wolf from Norse Mythology. The symbolism there is that Cloud's acting like a lone wolf by isolating himself. Mwarriorjsj7 (talk) 01:50, 20 May 2009 (UTC)


i think it would be mention the lawsuit over the music video made by Korean artist Ivy when she made a music video that reenacted scenes from advent children, here's a link to where i found the video; can anyone find any more info? Killemall22 (talk) 06:32, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Final Fantasy Advent Children Complete[edit]

you guys say the bundle pack will come with final fantasy versus and agito (i think) but the bundle includes a special edition final fantasy 7 PS3 (it has cloud's wolf crest on it). So i suggest we add it also comes with special edition final fantasy 7 PS3.DeathBerry talk 15:39, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

European Release of Advent Children Complete[edit]

The line "Advent Children Complete will be released in North America on June 2 2009[10] and on June 10 in Europe..." provides a reference for the NA release date but not the European one. Square Enix themselves have not yet confirmed the release date for Europe on their website. According to Amazon UK and it will not be released until July 27th. If it is in fact June 10th could someone please find a reference for this or edit it out until we have an announcement from Square Enix? PhishNatural (talk) 16:06, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

I read in an article somewhere recently that the EU release date is July 27th. bruntie666 (talk) 18:26, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
Lol, it's nice to see how you changed my edit. "You read somewhere" that the EU release is July 27th? *I fucking bought it* here in Italy in a department store on May 26th. Isn't that enough? -- (talk) 02:21, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
Here it is: (05/26/09), (available), (available) -- (talk) 02:29, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
All three links point to a different version of the movie. (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 21:14, 3 June 2009 (UTC).

There is no such thing as a "European" release. Every European country has a separate release date, as was the case for the original AC. (talk) 19:08, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

For your interest, I have changed the European flag icon to the UK flag, since as is stated above, there was NO simultaneous European release. (talk) 04:20, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Cast section[edit]

I'm thinking the cast section should removed and add a link of the main characters section to the plot. Since this is a film article, the characters just repeat info from plot while voice actors can be cited in characters lists and articles.Tintor2 (talk) 14:20, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

It makes sense to me, though I'd link it just to the list instead of the Advent Children characters section, just because it only contains Denzel. Loz, Yazoo, and Kadaj aren't listed because they only appear once, so because of that they should be just explained in the movie plot (which they have). WhiteArcticWolf (talk) 14:23, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

::If not voices from those characters could be move to plot in parenthesis (in my opinion).Tintor2 (talk) 14:32, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

I agree; it makes the most sense. WhiteArcticWolf (talk) 14:56, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Sales figures[edit]

The article current reads As of 2006, the DVD and UMD releases of Advent Children have sold over 10.5 million copies worldwide. But in the reception section of the article, it seems to indicate far less than that were sold. Where can reliable sales figures be found at? 10.5 million seems suspiciously high. Dream Focus 13:05, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Country and language[edit]

Okay, since people keep adding "US" and "English" to those two categories, let's clear this up: "Country" means country of origin, right? So it's only Japan, not Japan AND the United States. And "language" is supposed to tell the reader the original language the movie is in, right? Not all the languages it has been dubbed into (otherwise we'd have to add a ton of languages to a ton of Hollywood movies etc and also more than just "Japanese" and "English" to AC). (talk) 10:54, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Source request: Bahamut SIN[edit]

How do you people know that the enormous creature is called Bahamut SIN? Where is your source? Fleet Command (talk) 19:34, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

I don't know who added the SIN, but in interviews, the staff refer to it as another Bahamut.Tintor2 (talk) 23:14, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
It is actually called Bahamut SIN throughout all the guidebook Final Fantasy 10th Anniversary Ultimania. Added.Tintor2 (talk) 23:19, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Thank you! That's excellent!!! :)

I was getting really tired of people who kept telling me different fantastic names for this monster: Dark Bahamut, Bahamut Earthquake, Bahamuth Zero, etc. Now, I understand "Dark" and "Zero. (Maybe "Dark" means belonging or pertaining to an evil person, i.e. Kadaj. "Zero", comes from the assumption Kadaj had Cloud's materia from FFVII.) But earthquake? Someone watched Under Siege 2 one time too many... Fleet Command (talk) 15:57, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

GA review pass[edit]

The GA review has passed. There are no dead links here, other than one link to (which I removed because it was dead). Other than that, this article looks perfect for a GA. Nice work! If there are any additional comments, please let me know here. Darth Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 20:36, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Neutrality problem[edit]

Hello, everyone.

I was reading the article and all the time I was thinking "did someone made this article GA by mistake?" The plot section of this article is especially worthy of attention as it is written from an extremely radical point of view. Right now, I am watching the film and nothing I see in the film looks like what I read here. For example:

  • "Turks, a group that performs operations with the megacorporation Shinra". Where in the film is this megacorporation mentioned?
  • "Kadaj ends the battle when he discovers that Cloud does not have her." How did the article read Kadaj's mind? How did he read Cloud's mind? How did he discover that Cloud does not have her and how did this article discover the he discovered such a fact?
  • "...that will culminate in an assault on the Planet!" And how does this article know that?
  • "...Loz arrives at the church of the late Aerith Gainsborough." When exactly did the film mention that the church belonged to her?
  • "...he captures Marlene under Kadaj's orders." Under Kadaj's order? How do this article know that? (And by the way, "under Kadaj's order? Is it English?)
  • "...the populace who are trying to rescue the kidnapped children." And what implied that any rescue attempt was involved?
  • "...who are searching for Jenova's remains in the city's monument as informed by Rufus." And where in the film such a thing is implied?
  • "Rufus tells Kadaj that he has been in possession of Jenova's remains all along." No, he does not. He just reveals this fact. And why does this article say Jenova's remains? The film always refers to "Jenova's head" or "Jenova's friggin head".
  • "...after Rufus shoots and damages them." Were there multiple "Jenova's friggin head"s? How does this article know that?
  • "Yazoo and Loz are caught in an explosion..." Huh? In the film that I watched, they fought for 23 minutes; and yet this article somehow makes me think they are caught by random explosion! Who caused the explosion? Bin Laden? (Oh, sorry, please forgive my sarcasm. I do not mean to offend anyone but reading such things in a GA article ... let's just say it was hard to resist.)
  • "...which allows Sephiroth to reappear." How did Sephiroth exactly appear? Did he drop from the sky, teleported in, or all of sudden there was a Sephiroth? Well, in the film that I am watching, Kadaj transforms into Sephiroth.
  • "Cloud defeats Sephiroth"! My, my! The most intense fight in the film in which Sephiroth nearly kills Cloud is described in a manner makes one think Cloud hit Sephiroth with a flyswatter! Is Wikipedia:Neutral point of view really a founding pillar of Wikipedia or is a censorship court order in effect?
  • "...leaving a weakened Kadaj at Cloud's mercy." Okay, what I get from this sentence is: Kadaj had been fallen unconscious in a corner while Cloud was swatting Sephiroth with a flyswatter.

I hope these problems are addressed immediately before this article is stripped of its GA status.

Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 16:04, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

This is not how GA reviews are made. If you note some issues in the article, bold.Tintor2 (talk) 16:18, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
Hello, Tintor2
I am afraid I am not of the opinion that it is appropriate for anyone to edit just any article. But I am also not of the opinion that one should see problems and ignore them when he can report them. That said, I am afraid of being bold.
Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 16:31, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
Everybody is welcome to edit the article. If you remember the film, Kadaj actually transforms into Sephiroth using Jenova's remains (that was how Sephiroth always appeared in the game and even the director pointed that). Cloud is only almost killed in the fight against Sephiroth in the director's cut. This is a summary of the original version. Describing the fights in every detail would definitely be wp:fancruft (Sephiroth destroys a building, Cloud dodged its remains, he is ambushed when trying to recover, Cloud unleashes all his swords, Sephiroth claims he won't be a memory, etc.) Also, there are also lots of mistakes in your notes: there are people trying recover the kids but are attacked Kadaj's gang, Kadaj reveals his plan early, "Jenova's head" was just a nickname. It cannot fit into a box as pointed by the director. Lastly, check be civil. Regards. Tintor2 (talk) 16:48, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
Hello again, Tintor2
Which game? And director's cut? Nickname? Director? I am sorry; I really don't understand, I'm confused. How do you know all these? They are nowhere in the film. Umm, are you the film's producer?
I am not sure but I think some solid source really helps here.
Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 19:22, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
Which game? The only game mentioned in the section (FFVII) Director's Cut? Advent Children Complete which actually showed Cloud being nearly killed by Sephiroth. Nickname and director? Tetsuya Nomura commenting about the film in the DVD's extras. Aren't you familiar with the film or franchise? Regards.Tintor2 (talk) 19:47, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
The directors cut is Advent Children Complete, which was released in Japan, North America, and other territories. Jenova's head is just was Kadaj refers to it as; the director of the film stated it is more like a clump of cells. I believe this was stated in the Reunion Files (the AC guidebook), though I'd have to look through it to find out. If not, it was another Ultimania or interview. WhiteArcticWolf (talk) 19:44, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
Hello White Arctic Wolf and hello again, Tintor 2
Thanks for the description, although you guys just threw in another couple of things that I don't understand: Ultimania, AC guidebook and Reunion Files. But at least now I understand that Jenova is the nickname of a person called Tetsuya Nomura who appeared in a game called Final Fantasy VII, was Sephiroth's mother, is probably dead right now because the only thing that is left of her is a clump of her head's cell and she appears in DVD extras.
As for the DVD, sorry, my film is an HD film that I purchased online. It is almost two hours long and comes with a short bonus cartoon about this Denzel guy. And no, I am not familiar with the franchise; if I was, I would not be here.
Best regards,
Your confused friend,
Codename Lisa (talk) 20:35, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
The film's director is Tetsuya Nomura. When I said nickname I referred to "Jenova's head". While the characters mention Jenova's head, Jenova was decapitated by Sephiroth in the original game, and the director points that it would not fit in Rufus Shinra's box so it's just its remains. Considering your comment, the film you have is the director's cut in which Cloud vs Sephiroth is much longer and violent so now I understand some of the earlier comments. Regards.Tintor2 (talk) 23:57, 3 June 2012 (UTC)


Shouldn't the name of this film be Final Fantasy VII: Advent Children, as opposed to Final Fantasy VII Advent Children. IMDb lists it with the colon, and all official literature that I've seen does likewise, including the back of the Special Edition DVD box and the Advent Children Complete Blu-Ray box. Where does the idea of dropping the colon come from? Bertaut (talk) 19:26, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Looks like Dissidia Final Fantasy and Dissidia 012 Final Fantasy have the same problem.Tintor2 (talk) 19:39, 24 June 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.

GA Reassessment[edit]

This discussion is transcluded from Talk:Final Fantasy VII Advent Children/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.

Reassessment of the article based on Wikipedia:Good article criteria:

1. Well-written:

a. Fail.
  • The prose in Plot and Critical reception sections is far from clear. It often lacks cohesion and sometimes loses coherence. Both sections need extensive rewriting by an expert on the subject.
  • Collocation is a major problem throughout the article. For example, we never "express pressure". We express concern, fear, discomfort, anxiety, etc. due to the pressure. People do not do something "due to" someone's order, but rather "on" someone's order.
  • The Plot section makes no sense whatsoever to a layman who is far from being a devout fan of Final Fantasy VII series.
  • The Plot section is still far from good, as it does not properly reveal the main theme/foundation of the story. (Read details below.) (Updated 15:25, 28 June 2012 (UTC))
b. Fail. The lead section is not a summary of the whole article; one cannot expect the article to perfectly do without it. Rather, the rest of the article depends on this section as a necessary prelude that introduces critical novel info. For instance, sections Audio, Voice casting and Music assume that the reader knows about the difference between "Advent Children" and "Advent Children Complete". This info is only available in the lead section, since Promotion and release section comes much later.

2. Factual accuracy and verifiability

a. OK
b. Fail. Factual accuracy of the Plot section, in multiple cases, is already contested in the article talk page, yet the section entirely lacks source. It is assumed that the source of the whole section is supposed to be the film itself, yet the section contains statements that fail verification by the film. Tags that identified the problems are removed without the controversy being resolved.
c. OK

3. Broad in its coverage

a. Not checked
b. Fail. Critical reception section strays into unnecessary details. The first paragraph need to be deleted after its relevant contents re-integrated into the rest of the article. Simple test: Give this paragraph to someone unfamiliar with the topic and tell him/her to choose a heading title for it. Critical reception will not be his/her choice 100% of the times. Unnecessary details that confuse the reader are commonly found across the article. (Updated 15:25, 28 June 2012 (UTC))

4. Neutral

Fail. Plot section does not introduce the story from a neutral point of view. More specifically, it is chiefly written from the point of view of a devout Final Fantasy VII fan who has spent his time absorbed in the franchise.
OK. (Updated 15:25, 28 June 2012 (UTC))

5. Stable


6. Illustrated

Not checked. Article has a lot of difficult-to-understand aspects; perhaps images can help.

Codename Lisa (talk) 11:12, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Didn't you already point the plot issues in Talk:Final Fantasy VII Advent Children#Neutrality problem this month?Tintor2 (talk) 12:15, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
Hello, Tintor2.
I am watching your edits and unfortunately, you are just changing the position of the problem, instead of fixing it. It makes no different whether you call it "director's cut" or "Advent Children Complete"; so long as the reader has no clue what it is, you have not solved any problem. Perhaps you should consider chronological consolidation of facts where applicable.
And please bear in mind that "Advent Children Complete" problem was just an example. To receive full mark, you should make sure that the reader knows about all other necessary stuff. Another example is Compilation of Final Fantasy.
And finally, yes, you have spotted the correct discussion; make sure you resolve all the issues mentioned in it, even those the were proven to be source issues and copyedit issues instead of neutrality issues.
Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 14:32, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
Hi. I'm doing a little bit of work on this page to try to address some of these issues, so if you give me a day or two to get it done, that'd be great. One thing I would say though is regards the plot summary making sense to people who haven't played the game. I don't believe that's possible. The fact is that the film itself is impossible to follow unless one has at least a passing familiarity with the game. So for the plot to make sense to someone who knows nothing about the game, would require huge amounts of info about the game's plot. I know Square say the film stands alone, but it doesn't. The film assumes knowledge of the game's plot, so I don't think the plot summary could possibly work in such a way as to make sense to someone who doesn't know the game as well. If that makes any sense! I'll try to make it as clear as possible, but without going into detail on Sephiroth, Jenova, Hojo, Mako, the Lifestream etc, it's going to be very difficult. Bertaut (talk) 20:04, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
Hello, Bertaut
Your efforts will be appreciated. But no one is asking you to make the plot section diamond-cut understandable; all that is required is that it should be written from a neutral point of view instead of a devout fan's point of view. (And I personally disagree that the film assume knowledge of the game – but we don't have to agree on this point to make this article GA worthy.) What should be done here is a formal translation: Make sure the article says what you see there in the film. You don't have to feel uncomfortable about people not knowing about, say, Sephiroth; a simple qualifier like "a dangerous supervillain" will do. You don't have to be uncomfortable about introducing Shinra and its history; it can be safely deleted. Article may even have an Overview and a Background section.
Perhaps it would have been best if I myself re-wrote the Plot section but I know that I should not.
Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 21:32, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
Okay, fair enough. Well, I'll give it a go. I don't know if I'll be able to do that much as I don't have a huge amount of time to devote to it, and I've actually never worked on an article undergoing reassessment before, but I'll certainly see what I can do. I'm actually doing some tidy up work on all Final Fantasy VII related articles at the moment. Anyhow, I should post my edits in a day or two. Friday at the absolute latest. Bertaut (talk) 00:13, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
Hi gentlemen. Okay so, I found myself with a few unexpected free hours yesterday, and was able to get this done quicker than I anticipated. I've tried to address as many of the issues raised as I could, but whether or not I've done enough remains to be seen. I don't know. To explain a couple of things I've done - the troublesome first paragraph in the "Critical reception" section, I moved to a new "Legacy" section. It contains some interesting info, and I don't think it should just be removed. I've tried to fix up the plot section as best I could; I've added a couple of references and tried to give some minimal backstory, as well as fixing up the prose and some grammatical issues. I also rearranged the "Development" section to try to make it read like one continual piece, as opposed to a series of snippets. A couple of things I haven't addressed are the opening section, as I think it's fine as it is (and I'm not sure what you mean when you say the rest of the article doesn't make sense without it); the issue of Loz and Yazoo being caught in an explosion which you mention on the talk page (I don't see where the problem with this is - Reno and Rude leave a bomb on the road, and Loz and Yazoo are caught in the blast); I haven't given a blow by blow account of the battle between Sephiorth and Cloud, because as Tintor2 points out, that's not the purpose of a summary section, it's sufficient to simply say that Cloud defeats Sephiroth. Anyhow, there you go, I've done what I can, so let's see where we stand now. Bertaut (talk) 19:15, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
Hello, Bertaut
Well done. You have done an excellent job. I reviewed your edit and updated the assessment. In addition, I included a more detailed review below.
Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 15:25, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Detailed review 1[edit]

  • 'Science fiction film'
    • Not a science fiction film; it is a fantasy film. It certainly has supernatural themes like life beyond death, power of the spirits/dead, etc.
  • '...first title announced in the Compilation of Final Fantasy VII series, although it was the second title released, after the mobile phone game Before Crisis: Final Fantasy VII.'
    • Early bombardment of reader with potentially unknown info.
    • Sources are not allowed in the lead. Add references to the body prose, where they are once again covered.
  • 'Cloud ... is summoned to find the cause of "Geostigma"'
    • Citation need; not found in the body.
  • 'The film received mostly mixed reviews'
    • 'Mostly' must be deleted. 'Mixed', when used for a review, is neutral (middle ground) adjective. One thing cannot be mostly on the middle of a scale. (But it can be almost in the middle.)
  • Paragraph 1
    • Unnecessary details about the events of Final Fantasy VII. Article will do perfectly without them. There is no need to bombard the already confused viewer with more confusing things like "Holy". Just mention that two years has passed since the events of Final Fantasy VII that culminated in the fall of Sephiroth, a supervillain of immense power.
    • Bad introduction of Tifa, Cloud, Denzel and Marlene. Simply introduce them the way you introduce any film character whose film does not have a prequel. Denzel and Marlene have minor roles and therefore should receive only due amounts of attention.
  • Paragraph 2
    • Unnecessary details without source. Everything about Shinra, Turks, their past status and Sephiroth's considering himself Jenova's child needs source. Please focus on what they actually are in the film and do not be too hasty to give a supervillain an excuse to justify his being evil. Just introduce Rufus Shinra as you would introduce any antihero or auxiliary character in any film without a prequel.
  • Paragraph 3
    • Paragraph desperately needs a topic sentence.
    • Sephiroth summoned Meteor from the Forgotten City? Citation needed.
    • Unnecessary details again. Why "Forgotten City" is mentioned at all? The past history of the Forgotten City is not relevant in this film.
    • Missing details: At this point we are at the apex of the film, a turning point in which Cloud significantly changes. Before this point, he lost all battles and after this point, he is simply unstoppable. I don't know why but I suspect that woman in red jacket and "forgiveness" both have something to do with. I think this is the place where elaboration is needed.
  • Paragraph 4
    • Do not chronologically intertwine the Bahamut's fight and the revelation of mother's location. While it is suitable for film, it is not suitable for an article.
    • "...not before Rufus shoots and damages it." Grammar.
    • "...who had survived the explosion." Grammar.
    • "...over 2,000 years previously." Grammar: Adverb of time must modify the verb not another adverb of time. Consider either "...previously for over 2,000 years" or "...2,000 years before". Source: 2,000 year needs source.
    • "After a prolonged battle in Midgar..." The battle is plot-wise important; Cloud once again changes significantly during the battle. Explain how he was fighting a losing battle and why the tide suddenly turned.
  • General overview
    • Different parts of the film with equal importance do not receive equal coverage. The early parts of the film is overexplained while the late parts are underexplained. Overall, the important underlying foundation of the film is not well explained: "Survival" and "guilt and regret". (See Production section for source.) Correct me if I am wrong but Cloud overcame guilt and regret in the Forgotten City and resolved survival in his battle against Sephiroth, where he realized that although this life sucks, he cherishes everything about it. The plot section must explain these. The rest of the film is just pure visual appeal.
    • Nothing about Advent Children Complete is said.
  • "Compilation of Final Fantasy" and "Before Crisis" both need to be wikilinked.
  • This is a personal opinion and I will not hold it against the article if not resolved, but I think comments on "Compilation of Final Fantasy", "Before Crisis" and "Kingdom Hearts" seem not immediately relevant. Just mention that the film's focus was Cloud and Tifa and that Takeshi Nozue and Tetsuya Nomura have previously worked together.
  • Nothing about Advent Children Complete is said.
Voice casting
  • "The English release of the director's cut retained most of the original voice cast."
    • First mention of a director's cut without a prior introduction except in the lead section. Not good.
    • Which voice actor is changed?
    • The first instance of "director's cut" in the main prose must be wikilinked. (Lead is not part of the main prose.)
  • The director's cut (Advent Children Complete) is once again mentioned without any previous introduction in the main prose.

Codename Lisa (talk) 15:25, 28 June 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.

Article title[edit]

There is an ongoing discussion about the title of this article here. Axem Titanium (talk) 16:50, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Genre issue in the lead section[edit]

I am concerned about whether we should use "science fantasy", "fantasy", or "science fiction" in the lead section. Science fiction films deals with imaginary but plausible/supernatural content such as speculative information such as time travel, futuristic technology, space travel. Fantasy film are films with themes involving magic and supernatural events as well as exotic fantasy words and is considered be distinctive from science fiction film. Science fantasy films, however, is a mixed genre drawing elements from both science fiction and fantasy. Since FFVII:AC draws elements from both science fiction and fantasy, I personally think that we should go with "science fantasy film", as the manual of style for film articles states the major genres should be listed in the lead section (for example, Aliens (film) is a science fiction action film, drawing both science fiction and action elements). Thoughts? Darth Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 21:57, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Okay my friend, could you please iterate the science aspects of this film? Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 20:12, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
with difficult situations like this, its probably best to look for reliable sources to use such genre. I suggest just sticking with fantasy.Lucia Black (talk) 23:48, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
IMO, neither the science nor the fantasy are the principal focus of the film. I would probably just call it an "action film". Axem Titanium (talk) 14:41, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
Hi, Axem. Small problem: They are not mutually exclusive. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 02:54, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Science aspects are of course advanced machines and, well, science (even scientist characters, in the very modern/futuristic meaning of this word). That's the world with smart phones and human cloning, as opposed to the traditional fantasy that is medieval/ancient-inspired. Even "space travel" itself appeared for a while in the original game (a space rocket with the main characters entered the orbit, then returned). It's more SF than fantasy, actually (just the magic). --Niemti (talk) 14:59, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi, Niemti. I am afraid I do not see any of these in the film. Neither human cloning nor space travel; neither scientists nor advanced machines beyond what is nowadays conceived. And by the way, I have never seen "medieval/ancient-inspired" fantasy in my life; so calling it "traditional" requires a source. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 02:54, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
Unlogged because I don't log in to not waste time for a watchlist:
  • "Human cloning" was a shorthand for genetic human experimentation.
  • Medieval inspired fantasy films: Excalibur (film) directly, The Lord of the Rings film trilogy indirectly. Ancient inspired fantasy films: Clash of the Titans (2010 film) for example. (There are no science fantasy elements in neither of them.)
  • The film is SF, because it's a fictional world based on science (which is comparable with our scientifical level - down to the use of existing cell phone in a commercial product placement, but it doesn't matter). It's science fantasy, because magic exists in it. -- (talk) 13:53, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
Oh, and I forgot - the space rocket: [1] (not that space travel is aby necessary for the science fiction genre, but it's also there in FFVII). -- (talk) 18:13, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
Hello again, Niemti
I am afraid I do not see any of these in the film. Also the "Rocket Town" does not refers to something in this film; it seems to pertain to a video game of some sort. (Nevertheless, a failed rocket launch experiment which is not science fiction.)
As for your examples of medieval fantasy, I am afraid they are not sources. To say that "traditional" fantasy is "medieval" fantasy, you need a source. For I am sure neither me nor you have read or watched all fantasy works in the world to say which is traditional. (You just happen have seen more medieval one and I happen to have seen more non-medieval ones.) Or, we can drop this line of inquiry and be neutral towards fantasy; after all neither me nor you believe this film to be pure science fiction.
Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 19:41, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Of course a "failed rocket launch" is a science fiction motif. If someone makes a film featuring a failed fictional rocket launch in an alternative version of our planet Earth today, just ruled by Nazis or something (but with the same tech), it would be a science fiction too.

In fiction, the alternative universes are like that:

  • SF - when this alternative world is based on science (within it are also subgenres, cyberpunk and steampunk etc.)
  • Fantasy - when it's based on magic/supernatural (also subgenres, like high fantasy or dark fantasy or children's fantasy or historical fantasy)
  • Science fantasy - when it's both (like, cyberpunk, but with magic).

It's totally science fantasy and really no need to discuss it. --Niemti (talk) 21:01, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Btw, the Wikipedia article on science fantasy specifically mentions FFVII as an example of the genre ("popularly emphasized by games such as Final Fantasy VII and VIII, which incorporate fantasy elements such as magic in dystopian, futuristic world settings"). --Niemti (talk) 21:07, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Even it the film, FFVII and FFVIII are science fantasy, these claims must needs to have a reliable, third party source so we can verify the information. Darth Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 02:02, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
And yet we won't, because it was declared that there will now be no references in the lead. --Niemti (talk) 04:48, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
Also I think you're just going contrarian on me now, because you've first stated, quote: I personally think that we should go with "science fantasy film", as the manual of style for film articles states the major genres should be listed in the lead section without any demands for sources, but now as it's my "claims" so you've changed your mind. Maybe even subconsciously. --Niemti (talk) 04:54, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
If that's the case then, I apologize for my comment above. Darth Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 05:00, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Anyway, for example, [2] (FFXIII, but applies to FFVII as well). Btw, even the very Portal:Final Fantasy also says it's "a series of fantasy and science-fantasy role-playing video games" (some games in the series are indeed more purely fantasy, but that's not the ones with helicopters and cell phones). Oh, and this very line was either lifted from, or by Complex: [3] I'm not sure why it became suddenly any controversial, because it was given by everyone all the time. Also Eurogamer [4] (and also FFXIII, but really it's just the same). --Niemti (talk) 04:58, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Also the whole phrase "science fantasy" is just an easy way to say it's "SF but with fantasy elements, or vice versa", which it is. Just like this article says: "Most of the games since Final Fantasy IV have had science fiction elements, and the settings of VII, VIII, X, and XIII strongly departed from classic fantasy. Although they're not quite "science fiction," these settings are about as futuristic as a fantasy setting can become."[5] Also as of other websites, but RT and Amazon have it simply in "Science Fiction & Fantasy", which is no wonder because they don't differ between these genres. And at NYT it's "Sci-Fi Action, Anime",[6] so I guess it confirms stong SF elements in (final) fantasy film in case if someone still had any doubt regarding their existence. --Niemti (talk) 05:28, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

And I hope you won't be brickering on every other word like that. --Niemti (talk) 05:37, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi, Niemti
Please bear in mind that "Final Fantasy VII" (video game) and "Advent Children" (film) are different things.
And please bear in mind the the film itself is a very strong source: We see fantasy elements in the film that cannot be explained by science. (People defying gravity in both direction, spirits and apparitions intervening with the living, etc.) So, if another source say this film is "science fiction", it loses its credibility as a reliable source for that aspect.
I myself refrain to take side with "science fantasy" or "fantasy"; but I oppose "science fiction".
Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 16:02, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
sorry but if a source calls it science fiction it is not upto us to say it loses credibility. Go for whatever reliable source says period. I support for whatever sources say.Lucia Black (talk) 19:28, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
Hi, Lucia
If a reliable source say it is "science fiction", you'd be right. But a source that thinks magical dragons and humans returning from death are "science fiction", is not reliable. Even my grandmother knows that they are fantasy; and seriously, sources in Wikipedia must be more reliable than my grandmother.
Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 19:44, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
Please stop writing things out like a letter. Way too detached. Regardless....but now we'e heading into subjective territory. Your grandmother is no t a reluable source unless she can prove credibility. I will say magibc has been treated as a form of science. Plus the term sci fi has lost its meaning along the way. Now the new term cyberpunk is basicallyscience fiction. Regardless the point is, we dont judge the source simpmly because we dont agree. Film does hold scirnce fiction and fantasvy. However using a genre such as science fantasy is to specifuc to use unless sources aee ptovided.Lucia Black (talk) 19:56, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
Hi, Lucia
A source that thinks magical dragons and humans returning from death are 'science fiction', is not reliable.
Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 23:00, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
And that's why it's not totally science fiction, but science fantasy. (And the NYT is still a reliable source. You can't say "it's not relibale because I disagree".) --Niemti (talk) 20:24, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
Hi, Niemti
I never said "it's not relibale because I disagree". I said "a source that thinks magical dragons and humans returning from death are 'science fiction', is not reliable."
Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 23:00, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
You pointed several times to Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources, but did you even actually read it? Also that's precisely why it's actually science fantasy. Can we stop discussing it? --Niemti (talk) 23:39, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
Should I stop discussing or should I answer your question "did you even actually read it?" (; Just joking. Yes, we can stop.
Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 23:54, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Point is, you're assuming too much what sources imply. And again, this is subjective. We shouldn't call it science fantasy just yet. its WP:SYNTHESIS if we u se the source to say Final fantasy VII (video game) genre affects it's film sequel Advent children. Many series (especially in japan) have mixed both science fiction with "dragons" and etc. We can't say anything more. And if a source claims it to be science fiction, then who are we to claim its not true and that they are unreliable?Lucia Black (talk) 20:45, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Hello, Lucia
For the life of me, I can't understand you. Perhaps you'd care paraphrase?
Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 08:38, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
too subjective for us to assume any genre. Every specific genre should be sourced for the film without question.Lucia Black (talk) 02:17, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
Also, just to clarify, WP:LEADCITE states that "there is not, however, an exception to citation requirements specific to leads." The guideline also states that the need for citations are "determined on a case-by-case basis by editorial consensus." "Complex, current, or controversial subjects may require many citations; others, few or none." As such, the presence of citations in the introduction is neither required nor it is prohibited. Make sense? Darth Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 02:24, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
Hello, friends
That is completely true, but also irrelevant because no one here disputed it. In fact, Niemti supplied three sources to that effect. (For a time, I was playing devil's advocate to encourage him to voice the scientific aspect and to show that those sources can support their own weight. But that's over.) Sources agree, I agree, Niemti agree and Darth Sjones23 started this discussion by saying he agrees. Looks like we overshot consensus.
Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 22:51, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
reviwing the sources i question certain ones on their reliability. Also i dont see a clear consensus. Also niemti played with the meanng of the sources. Like i said no clear consensus.Lucia Black (talk) 03:31, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

GA revamp[edit]

All right. Here's what we need to do per the GA reassessment:

  • Lead - I think we should expand it to three or four paragraphs and address the GA complaints. This also includes details on the production section and also a premise must be added.
  • Plot - needs a complete rewrite, but must maintain the 400-700 word count per WP:FILMPLOT and also address the reassessment complaints.
  • Production - "Compilation of Final Fantasy" and "Before Crisis" must be wikilinked (done! Finduilas 09 (talk) 05:22, 23 March 2013 (UTC)) and Advent Children Complete needs to be introduced as well.
  • Voice casting - must conform with GA complaints.
  • Music - the director's cut must be mentioned.

I think it would be great if we would work together to improve the article. Any other suggestions? Darth Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 01:45, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

I don't think there were changes regarding the music in ACC other than the new song "Safe and Sound" (which was already mentioned) and a brief extension of "One-Winged Angel".Tintor2 (talk) 02:44, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi all, just discovered the discussion here while doing other FF7 edits and I would be interested in helping. How exactly does Wikipedia want us to incorporate a sense of theme into the plot section without getting overly editorial? Does the summary need better flow, or better context for thematically important elements, or language that gives a better sense of the plot's rhythm and impact? Or none of the above? I'm a little unclear on what's preferred, and I don't want to rewrite the whole thing only to find I've done it wrong. If anyone can point me in the right direction here I'd appreciate it. Finduilas 09 (talk) 05:13, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

For a good guide how to write film plots, please see WP:MOSFILM#Plot. However, please be aware that per this guideline, plot summaries for feature films should be between 400 and 700 words. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 06:29, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
Thanks. I did a revamp last night of the whole section and it's currently 681 words. Hope it helps. If there's material that can still be cut out, great. Finduilas 09 (talk) 02:53, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
Hello, Finduilas
I am looking at your work, and the plot section looks worse than even before. Examples:
  • "...super-soldier Cloud Strife defeated the villain Sephiroth..." Cloud was neither a solider nor a SOLIDER and therefore not super form of either.
  • "...serve as caretakers to the orphan..." Cloud does not do so. He is almost always away. In fact, Marlene emphasizes on this point in the Complete edition of the film.
  • "Recently, Cloud has moved out of the house and isolated himself from his friends." First, "recently" is not allowed per WP:DATED. Plus, how do you know it was recent? Second, no Cloud has not "moved out". He has left, yes, but has not moved out. (Those who have seen the film know this but we are not writing this article for them.) Third, no, he has not isolated himself. Tifa has his phone number. This is a critical point.
  • "Cloud is contacted by the Shinra Company". (1) No such thing as "Shinra Company" exists in the film. (2) Cloud is contacted by Tifa.
  • "Rufus asks for Cloud's help to stop three mysterious men... Cloud refuses to help and leaves." Although I am not against summarizing things, I am against misinformation. Cloud does not refuse to stop the three; he refuses to help rebuild Shinra, which Rude naively blurts out.
  • "...extraterrestrial Jenova." Do we have a terrestrial Jenova too? Or wait; is it meant to be "Jenova, the extraterrestrial invader"?
  • "Kadaj and his colleagues are recruiting children infected with Geostigma." Recruiting? What I saw in the film did not look like recruitment. A few words later, the article says "all the kidnapped children" which contradicts the former.
  • "Loz follows Tifa and Marlene to Aerith's church." Follows? We don't know that.
  • "...replies that he's never tried to forgive." First, "he's"? What does a broken form do in a Wikipedia article? Second, "forgive"? Wrong. Cloud asked whether it is possible to be forgiven; Vincent replied that has has never tried [to be forgiven] (which is a references to his attempt to "atone for his sin" in Final Fantasy VII. In fact he meant the opposite.) Third, reader probably does not know that so, even after fixing the first and second issue, the sentence remains misleading. Vincent in fact encouraged Cloud to try.
  • "...and other great monsters..." and "...engages in a great battle..." Avoid puffery. "Great" is subjective. To me, neither the battle nor the monsters were "great". To others, it is different.
  • "Kadaj confronts Rufus Shinra." Are you sure he just confronts? Are you sure he hasn't been keeping him captive the whole time?
  • "He attempts to destroy it." No he does not. Even if you think the remains of Jenova would not have survived a fall, there is no evidence to believe Rufus thought the same.
  • "Yazoo and Loz are apparently destroyed." The word "destroyed" does not collocate with human-beings or bipedal creatures that sufficiently resemble human – both in form and manner of action.
  • " explosive..." Colloquial; not suitable for article. Consider using "bomb", "explosion", etc.
  • "...ultimately subduing him". Cloud never subdues Kadaj. Subdued people are either too wounded to do anything or are tied up. Neither can transform into Sephiroth.
  • "They charge at him..." No, they don't. Cloud charges at them. See charge (warfare).
  • You did not address the essence/theme/motif issue.
Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 07:03, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
In addition, here's the full definition of WP:FILMPLOT:
Plot summaries are self-contained sections ("Plot", "Plot summary") in film articles that complement wider coverage about the films' production, reception, themes, and other real-world aspects (see WP:PLOT). Since films are primary sources in their articles, basic descriptions of their plots are acceptable without reference to an outside source. As WP:PSTS says, "...a primary source may be used only to make descriptive claims, the accuracy of which is verifiable by a reasonable, educated person without specialist knowledge... Do not make analytic, synthetic, interpretive, explanatory, or evaluative claims about information found in a primary source." Since the film is the primary source and the infobox provides details about the film, citing the film explicitly in the plot summary's section is not necessary. Exceptions to the rule include upcoming films and "lost" films (which are not available to the public to verify), for which editors should use secondary sources.
Plot summaries for feature films should be between 400 and 700 words. The summary should not exceed the range unless the film's structure is unconventional, such as Pulp Fiction's non-linear storyline, or unless the plot is too complicated to summarize in this range. (Discuss with other editors to determine if a summary cannot be contained within the proper range.) Complicated plots may occasionally require clarifications from secondary sources, so cite these sources in the section. If there are differing perspectives of a film's events from secondary sources, simply describe the events on screen as basically as possible in the plot summary and report interpretations in another section of the article. Lastly, events in the film do not have to be written in the order in which they appear on screen. If necessary, reorder the film's events to improve understanding of the plot. See how to write a plot summary and copyediting essentials for more in-depth suggestions.
The plot summary is an overview of the film's main events, so avoid minutiae like dialogue, scene-by-scene breakdowns, and technical detail. Per Wikipedia's content disclaimer and guideline on spoilers, all of the film's important events should be outlined without censoring details considered spoilers and without using disclaimers or warnings in the article. In short, Wikipedia contains spoilers; please respect this policy.
Hope this helps somewhat. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 07:25, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
Per Sjones, the former plot was too long. Keep it, and fix its inaccuracies. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 13:22, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
Hello, Surreal. Sjones never said anything about sacrificing every single aspect of text quality to make it 54 words shorter. The MOS prose he has quoted sanctions the use of longer plots in case complications arise. ("...unless the plot is too complicated to summarize in this range.") That is exactly the case here. I leave it to the rest of you guys to decide which text to keep but frankly, with this prose, the article is going to have a hard time becoming a WP:BA, let alone WP:GA. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 15:34, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
I'm just trying to prevent revert wars, just sort it out and be conservative about the reverting. Perhaps something could be worked out in sandbox first. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 16:26, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
Hello. That is kind of you, I am sure, but I am afraid what you did was a counter-revert, which is quite the opposite of what you intended. You actually started a revert war. To address a dispute, one must retain the version before the change, not after. (Comment: Joel Spolsky once mentioned that it is only in cartoons when a third character shouts the loudest at two arguing characters and ends the fight. In reality, this turns a two-sided fight into a three-sided fight. Likewise, you cannot stop a revert war by entering it. In general, it is impossible to prevent a revert war except by a block; for a revert war is fueled by the parties' lack of interest in discussion. Discovering this issue is one problem, curing it before it turns into revert #2 is another bigger one.)
Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 06:46, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

My focus was on streamlining the plot summary and improving its flow, clarity, and accessibility to non-FF7 fans. If there are errors or misleading language, by all means fix them. I only saw the film for the first time last Wednesday and was working from memory and online synopses. And might I suggest that when doling out criticism in the future, even criticism as commendably detailed and on point as this, you learn to deliver it in a less hurtful tone. You'll find it makes people a whole lot more cooperative. Finduilas 09 (talk) 07:19, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Hello. Oh, I certainly tried to fix by reverting to the error free version. You can see the result above. This was my first attempt to make any significant change in this article. Now, apart from the fact that I am not welcome to "fix", it is very difficult and nearly impossible to "fix" an intrinsically bad text. As far as your statement concerns, I do not see any improvements in flow, clarity or ease of understanding for non-fans like myself. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 08:08, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
I have filed an RFC so that uninvolved editors will chime in. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 16:50, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
My call to have the mistakes fixed was simply due to the fact that these inaccuracies were the main focus of your initial assessment. The lack of a similar invitation regarding other elements of the passage was not intended as a rejection of others' stylistic input. Please do not construe it as such. Anyone is welcome to make any change to my or anyone else's contributions if it improves the article. If I wasn't okay with that, I wouldn't be here. Let's move on. (talk) 08:07, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

RfC: Plot summary in Final Fantasy VII: Advent Children[edit]

How should we streamline the Final Fantasy VII: Advent Children plot summary to make it accessible to fans who are unfamiliar with the Final Fantasy VII game and the Final Fantasy series in general? Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 13:07, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Quite frankly, I have no idea how to salvage this. You might try to put in a "Setting" section as part of the plot synopsis, but that sounds rather like it would be encouraging rather than fixing the problem. I will continue to think, but I can't see much of a way out for now. --ProtoDrake (talk) 13:49, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
Hi. I think this can only be accomplished by abandoning the futile way of thinking that has been predominant so far: That we can and must cram a summary of plot, its meaning, its explanation for ordinary people, its interpretation and its Final Fantasy backgrounds into the Plot section while keeping it below 700 words. C'mon people, this is Japanese film. Unlike, Hollywood that makes something official by repeating it a mole plus one times, this film only drops hints.
IMHO, we should have a plot section, a characters section, a settings section and a prelude section. Wikipedia:Summary style should be used whenever necessary. But above all, we must drop the assumption that it is a Final Fantasy VII film. It is not. It is no longer the Cloud and his fantastic eight against the evil Sephiroth. This is a Cloud film; the subject is Cloud, his family, his post-traumatic stress disorder and Kadaj. The climactic scenes that should be emphasized are "Is it me or a memory?", "Dilly dally, shilly shally! Isn't time you did the forgiving?", "I feel lighter already" and most importantly "tell me what you cherish most!" People do not need to understand Final Fantasy to understand despair, guilt, recovery and the miraculous effect of having a reason to live for. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 16:14, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
I feel that a prelude section or a character section should not be included. As for the plot summary, in addition to providing secondary sources, we should stick to what is presented in the film itself as well. We should also create a themes section for the film itself. As I have stated, I posted the RFC so outsiders can chime in and provide their thoughts about this matter. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 16:56, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
I agree with Sjones23 that there shouldn't be a characters section, this page already exists for the characters of the Final Fantasy VII franchise, so there isn't a need for a characters section. A characters name can easily be linked to that section of the pre-existing characters page. Also, the plot section does need a bit of a rewrite, i would offer to do it myself, but i love this movie too much to not word it in a way that might come across biased. As for something Codename Lisa brought up, unless there is proof that says this movie is a 'Cloud movie' then you can't refer to it a such. It is a continuation of the storyline from the game, hence it is a Final Fantasy movie. I'm not saying that it does/does not highlight the subjects mentioned, but for the article we are mentioning information on the movie itself to the readers not the underlying issues it can represent.
Overall though, I think if we can all work together and pool our ideas and sources etc, then we can get this article back up to a GA status or better Thanks – Blue☆Stars83 19:28, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
Hello. I never said repeat the whole Character page here. In fact, I mentioned Wikipedia:Summary style, which is what you want, dear Blue Stars. Still, suit yourselves guys, just let me give you all a word of caution: the type of thinking that caused a problem does not fix it. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 22:29, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
I do apologise, i didn't pay too much attention, i misread. As a summary style i can agree that will be a good idea, to have a redirect to that characters list page under a characters header is much better. Again i apologise. For clarification though, i am merely giving my opinion on something at this stage, i am nowhere near as good a wikipedian as some of you are yet, so if i misconstrue something then please politely let me know. But, I would like to work with other editors try and help better this article as best i can. Thanks – Blue☆Stars83 23:04, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

I dont agree the article should have a setting section or a character section. Sure, maybe if it introduced a large cast of characters that werent introduced before. However, this is a sequel. Sequels dont need the extent of a whole new section becuase it will all be too redundant, especially if these sections have heir own articles.Lucia Black (talk) 00:44, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

That's what i was thinking originally. After thinking it through though, having a Characters section would be worthwhile, not to have any information about characters, but to have a link to the Characters of the Final Fantasy VII series page, instead of having all the same info on this article when there's an article for it already. It's worth it in my opinion, if i came to this article, and saw a link to the Characters article then i'd take that than having to type in a search for it instead. These are just my opinions though, thanks – Blue☆Stars83 00:56, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Thats already in the plot section tho, isnt it? If not, then it should.Lucia Black (talk) 01:09, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Yes you're right it is, but i think what's being spoken about is to make the plot section more accesible to people who aren't really familiar with this franchise. Or Wiki itself in a way i suppose. So, on that premise a Character section could be a worthwhile idea, with the link there instead of included in the plot. As i said though, i'm just leaving an opinion on this. I wouldn't want to do anything about it myself. At least not just yet, until i'm more experienced in the Wiki anyways. See how everyone else views how the article should look. Thanks – Blue☆Stars83 01:20, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
Its already accesible. This article shouldnt be so redundant on info such as that. First time readers will take in discretion that this is a sequel. Therefore any lack of understanding is because they arent familiar with the original.Lucia Black (talk) 03:13, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
Hello, Lucia. You are disregarding the fact that critics have criticized this film for its undue connection to Final Fantasy VII. This shows that unlike what you think, first time readers may not plausibly pass it as a sequels. In addition, this article already has a lot of unique character info not included in Characters article, some scattered about and some under Voice Casting section. What I visualize is consolidating those fragments and make something like Prometheus (film) § Cast by adding sourced info that helps understand the plot better.
For over six years the plot section of this article has gone under major and minor revisions but a satisfactory result is never achieved. Let's face it: The burden is too heavy for 700 words. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 10:37, 26 March 2013 (UTC)×

youre getting subjective now. The only "unique" characters are Kkadaj, loz and yazoo. First time readers WILL se it as a sequel in some way. Its impossible for them NOT to see it as such.Lucia Black (talk) 18:05, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

I think when it comes to a Characters section we can just use it for a link to the existing characters article. Kadaj, Loz and Yazoo are listed in that article, not a lot of info, but they are listed. As is every character that appears in the movie. If any extra info needs putting for any character, it may aswell be added to the Characters article. So, any additional info wouldn't be necessary for this article, in my eyes. Thanks – Blue☆Stars83 18:16, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
i think we have more than enough consensus not to use make setting and character sections.Lucia Black (talk) 22:43, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
I agree, I do not believe this article needs its own Characters section and Setting section. A link to the existing characters article should be sufficient, as the characters unique to the movie (the trio and Denzel) are already included. Eidolonic (talk) 20:21, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Explaining plot better[edit]

Would a setting section be useful to make the plot easier to understand? The section currently has 658 words and adding far more could be overdoing it. Additionally, we could make a cast section as in the other anime film article Persona 3 The Movie: Chapter 1, Spring of Birth. Any suggestions? Regards.Tintor2 (talk) 14:39, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Hi. That's part of what I originally suggested earlier. So, I guess that means a support. :) Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 16:15, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Music issue[edit]

Hello, guys

Finding sources sometimes gives one a bad headache, especially, if one is not good with Japanese sources. I've been looking for sources about the music and different sources say different things about the ending theme. Two sources have shown me contradictory screenshots at 1920×1080 resolution showing the ending credit roll: One says:

"Kyosuke Himuro"

The other says:

"Safe and Sound"
"Kyosuke Himuro & Gerard Way"

Now, the 1920×1080 resolution means ACC. But how could this be?

Another source gave me a more confusing answer: English ACC using "Calling" and Japanese ACC uses "Safe and Sound". Wait a minute! Japanese version uses an English song and English version uses a Japanese song? Someone has definitely made a mistake here, but is the director or the source?

Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 09:53, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

CL, I think it is important for you to understand how this text of yours looks to us. From your edit history, I am guessing you found a source that failed verification, made an attempt to find sources of your own for it, couldn't do that, and now you are reporting what you did here as additional explanations for your {{Failed verification}}. But this isn't how this text looks to us: It has no visible connection to your tag and talks about sources for which you provided no external links. Please don't hit me, but WP:WEASEL?
Okay, these are all my guesses but if it is wrong, I am at a loss why must you give yourself "a bad headache" "looking for sources about the music" when it has footnotes. But obviously a source has failed verification and the burden of having found a correct source was with the original contributor. Fleet Command (talk) 12:54, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
To close this issue- I've found a source that says that Gerard Way co-produced and sang a bit on "Safe and Sound", and added it to the article to replace the verification tag. --PresN 22:32, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Interview question[edit]

I've found what is said to be a translation of an interview with Tetsuya Nomura, Takeshi Nozue and Kazushige Nojima; it is given an original publication date of September 14, 2005. It has some interesting information about some of the production. Can anyone find anything about its original source, so it can be cited properly? If not, can it be used or must this information forever be barred from Wikipedia due to its presence on a fan site? --ProtoDrake (talk) 19:43, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi. If the original source is found, yes, the fan translation can be used because we have the tool to authenticate it: Google Translate and Bing Translator. CS1 Citation modules allow translation to be added to the original.
Fan sites have some aspects of reliable sources too. Fans can be excellent secondary sources because they collection and preserve with passion. But stay away from their primary sources like toxic! Their theories about the works of fiction is mind boggling 99.99% of times wrong. (They WILL successfully convince you that Lucrecia is Cloud's mother and Hojo is called "Bill" by his fellow scientists.)
Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 21:16, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
Thanks. I hope someone else can succeed where I failed. I had an intensive look. By the way. during that look, I found this different Famitsu interview with the three of them concerning some of the changes and technology involved with Advent Children Complete. From what I read via Google Translate, some of the rendering technology for Complete was then being used by Visual works for the game that is now Final Fantasy XV. --ProtoDrake (talk) 22:03, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

Reference question[edit]

Does anyone know the status on using Anime News Network as a source? Asking because if it's not a reliable source, I'm going to have to spend a ton of time tracking down where they got their information from, they're used heavily in the last few sections. --PresN 00:34, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

From looking around the Anime project and RS/N, it looks like anything under a "/news" url on the site is considered reliable, though I might still try to replace some of them with the original (probably Japanese) source if it's easy to find. --PresN 00:42, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Final Fantasy VII: Advent Children/GA3. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: NathanWubs (talk · contribs) 20:28, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Planning to review this article tonight. Will take my time as this is my first time reviewing a Gan. So I might finish it up tomorrow. NathanWubs (talk) 20:28, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Rate Attribute Review Comment
1. Well written:
1a. the prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct.

The writing is clear and concise. I do not see any major spelling and grammar errors. Prose in plot section is clear. The setting section helps to make the story section better understandable.

1b. it complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.

Complies with the manual of style guidelines. Lead section is good, not perfect but good.(see FA rec at bottom)

2. Verifiable with no original research:
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
2b. all in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines.

There are no neutrality issues with this article. Things that might be challenged are properly sourced. Including the plot section not only using itself as source

2c. it contains no original research.

Yes, the content of the article abides by the sourcing. No original synthesis found

3. Broad in its coverage:
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).

The topics go not in extraneous detail or even mention of details if not written in the article pages and sources themselves.

4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.

No edit wars or major changes going on with the article.

6. Illustrated, if possible, by images:
6a. images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content.

All images have rational to them why they adhere to the fair use policy

6b. images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.

All images have a point in context of the article and their placing. Captions are concise and factual

7. Overall assessment.
Waiting for an overview from a mentor if I did things probably. After that I will add my FA recommendations here instead. NathanWubs (talk) 23:18, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
Going to offer a second opinion. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 20:42, 8 April 2015 (UTC)