Talk:Cloud Strife/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Untitled

Please read before editing:

• Be sure to read through the topics below, and if you want to ask a team of dedicated Final Fantasy editors for input, see Wikipedia:WikiProject Final Fantasy.
• Be sure to date any and all comments that you make in discussions, and please sign your comments using ~~~~.

Archiving

Okay. The page was WAY too big. Plus, the last discussion held here was over 6 months ago. It's time to finally archive this thing. New discussions and continuation of previous discussions should be placed below. Thanks!  Dylanlip  (talk) 16:02, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Fantasy Casting

Is the use of Fantasy Casting for a non-existent movie relevant to character pages? 68.55.153.254 (talk) 22:42, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

That was not my point. The point was digging more character comments to the point of relating them with actors.Tintor2 (talk) 22:44, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

And several users pointed out through various ways that it serves no purpose to the articles, and violates several policies, none of which you have shot down other that just saying "no it doesn't" or something akin to that just because you don't like it. I've already put the request it, I'm not taking it down. 68.55.153.254 (talk) 22:49, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

The first: SPS is a reliable source. Then crystal ball which even the article's name tells it is not happening, so it does not violate it. The comments from others editors such as trivia, undue were so that's why I rewrote the sentences to fit in the paragraphs.Tintor2 (talk) 22:57, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

In the Critical Reception section, there's a fan casting of Robert Pattinson as Cloud. I fail to see how any kind of fantasy casting is important or at all notable to any of these articles, considering there's hundreds if not thousands of them out there, and there's no reason one should be singled out above all others unless there's relevance to an actual live action movie being produced. I've removed several from the other FF7 character pages, but since this is locked, I'm unable to remove this one, and I'm hoping someone else can take care of this for me. Thank you.68.55.153.254 (talk) 02:06, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

This one is from a wp:reliable source and helps to expand the articles' notability. Reverted all the good faith removals.Tintor2 (talk) 11:47, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

That is NOT a reliable source. If anything, it is a self-published source which gives an opinion on a subject, "Who should play Cloud in a live-action movie?", that has no bearing on an article that discusses the character in game form. Nor does Wikipedia ever include things that not even close to being a certainty, and a live action FF7 film has never been anything but a fan dream, so when that does happen, then maybe these would be relevant, but only if they are actually being considered for the role, not "possibilities" or "fan castings". Removing them again, and if someone could please remove the one from this page. I will go an ask for moderation on this if necessary. 68.55.153.254 (talk) 22:21, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Any gaming site gives their opinion on a subject and the site did not state that fans want a live action film, just their opinion and something the site already did with other franchises. Besides already being listed by the project as reliable, 1UP is also a site owned by another reliable source, UGO Entertainment, so it is not selfpublished. I'm surprised that you only remove such link, considering there are more 1UP articles in the FF characters' reception sections. The FF characters have appeared in more than games, so there's nothing weird that they have this kind of discussion, considering the site is commenting on the characters. Attain a consensus before removing content. Tintor2 (talk) 22:45, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

While 1up is a reliable source, I don't think I gain much understanding of Cloud as a character from that article. I don't learn anything about how he was received (cf. "critical reception"), and the article seems to just say "wouldn't it be cool if...?" without actually telling you much. Axem Titanium (talk) 22:49, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

The article is not meant to explain his character, just compare him with an actor which serves as part of critical reception.Tintor2 (talk) 22:52, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Because the article isn't meant to explain his character or describe how he was received by critics, I don't think it belongs in a "critical reception" section. Axem Titanium (talk) 23:12, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

The actual writer actually is a critic and his comments are how he receive it.Tintor2 (talk) 23:16, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

I have to be honest...it does feel rather reaching in all these articles. I've seen these fantasy-cast ideas in published magazines even, and even then I don't like the idea of using them as reception.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 23:28, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

"Because the article isn't meant to explain his character or describe how he was received by critics" - Exactly! There is no discussion of how it works with the character in the games, only an opinion of who should play him in a nonexistent movie. Saying the writer is a critic and doing some fantasy casting of who he sees playing him is all that it takes to make it into an article, then I'll go around to every other site like 1up and put those in too. It's too broad of subject about something that isn't even a possibility or a speck on the horizon of the film industry. It's splitting hairs to try and justify it being in the article just because you can call the author a critic and that the characters have appeared in other things besides the main game. Then talk about them in the context of those appearances, not in the context of something that isn't happening. Wiki is an encyclopedia, not a discussion of what might happen. 68.55.153.254 (talk) 23:55, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Going off of that, I don't think a "fantasy casting" counts as how you "receive" a character. You can only really receive a character (or any fictional thing) in the context of the original fiction and other published works. Anything beyond that probably falls under speculation. We don't include the many, many IGN articles about "wouldn't it be cool if this game had feature x" or "wouldn't it be great if character x was in Super Smash Bros" as legitimate references, for example. Axem Titanium (talk) 01:19, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Answering to Axem, there is no speculation, just opinions. Nevertheless, article use those IGN articles, and removing it would imply remove every feature article from wikipedia. Every feature article just as "top () characters", "best characters", "best outfits" (something used a lot here) shows how a critic received the character. Moreover, the point of the article is comparison just like it's done in most articles: in Sephiroth, he is compared with Kefka and the opposite; in Tidus, he is compared with Squall, and there's no complain about comparing two people. Even in Tifa Lockhart, she is compared with other video game characters, so I don't see the reason why a comparison between a video game character and an actor is not worth mentioning.Tintor2 (talk) 01:51, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

I think there's a substantive difference between speculative articles like "who'll be in the next Smash Bros game" and evaluative articles like "top 10 characters". While they both rely on the journalist's opinion, the latter is more closely tied to the original fiction and is a direct response to how the reviewer felt while playing the game about this character. Axem Titanium (talk) 03:47, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

But both give the critic's opinion about the fictional character, with the former also giving thoughts about the how the author wishes a character to appear, so there is no difference.Tintor2 (talk) 16:00, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

I have seen "who should be in the next Smash Bros game" articles used in a few character articles. I think they are completely legit as reception. The author thinks the subject is a popular enough character to be included in the game. That fits the description. Although I am not sure if this casting source would be best for reception. It could work, but it isn't needed. Cloud has plenty of reception, and this one source won't be missed. _Blake ^{(Talk·Edits)} 19:48, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

So you say that adding reception to this article won't improve it? Did you see the state of GA Lara Croft's reception? Besides, it's not like the source is mentioning something already mentioned lots of times in the article.Tintor2 (talk) 19:52, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

But there is where you run into a big problem. You say Sephiroth is compared to Kefka and Tidus to Squall and so forth, but that is comparing two characters within the same franchise that can add a view on the franchise overall. Comparing a video game character to one random actor in a HUGE sea of actors opens up a whole can of worms of which actor embodies this aspect, and who has this aspect, and who has that aspect, and those aspects as well are shown by these actors and on and on. It doesn't add any view on the franchise or the original character, but calls for a debate on who should play who, because if you take 20 different people and ask them who should play Cloud, odds are you are going to get 20 different answers, and no one of those opinions is more important than the others. So if you are going to include one opinion, then you are going to need to include all the others. 68.55.153.254 (talk) 01:05, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Are there more opinions from reliable sources? I guess there are not. Moreover, I stated that comparison are also made with characters from different franchises or actors, and there is nothing wrong about it.Tintor2 (talk) 15:39, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

I have no doubt in my mind that there are plenty of other sources about Cloud. The mere fact that there are people objecting to a particular source is a perfectly good reason to remove it and find some other source. There's no lack of reception at the moment so one piece won't be missed, and you'll save yourself effort down the line when you have to defend it at a more structured process like FAC. Axem Titanium (talk) 17:49, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Consensus is not gained by votes. Also, there is not a rule that says when is reception information unnecesary, so it's makes no sense removing it because editors don't like it.Tintor2 (talk) 18:20, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

I don't believe I said anything about voting. I'm saying that when there exists a surplus of sources and one is narrowing down which ones to include, it's perfectly rational to remove one source that people have had objections to and replace it with one that no one objects to. Axem Titanium (talk) 21:34, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

And what is the rational objection? From all the comments, it the main opinion is that they don't like casting articles, but it goes against being neutral and the reason why I find it the source worth it, it's because is commenting something none of the other sources mention: a comparison to between the character and an actor.Tintor2 (talk) 22:17, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

The rational objection has been stated a dozen times already, that it adds nothing to the article except a biased viewpoint on a subject that has no real reason to be included in the article because it is about something that is not even happening at this juncture. You talk about neutrality, but if you want to actually make it neutral, you need to have more than one viewpoint on the subject, which you already wrote off in a previous response earlier when I said the same thing before. Did you even look? Either way, it's a touchy subject in general. Fantasy casting by fans it always touch and go, many times fans will think their choices a better than anyone else's and will heavily object and argue over it which will lead to edit wars. But again, having one and only one view on this casting subject is not keeping things neutral because it is a subject that can have literally dozens of opinions on it, and ones that people will vehemently thinks are better than others. So to prevent that, it's better to not have something that will cause it at all. Also, again, this is discussion for an event that isn't even happening, which is not something supposed to be on Wiki anyway because Wiki is not a crystal ball. And it was said that this whole topic needed a consensus anyway, and while there has been no voting, which I don't know why it was mentioned at all, there only seems to be one person for keeping the casting in the article, and everyone else who has commented sees no reason to keep them or is of the opinion for removing them. That sounds like more of a consensus, and I see no reason they shouldn't be removed. 68.55.153.254 (talk) 19:17, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Every article's reception I worked has dozen of opinions. Did you read Sephiroth's article? Some call it a good villain, while others overrated. Zack has been called from likeable to annoying. And there are no other opinions coming from reliable sources, so I guess there is only one opinion suitable for wikipedia. Until now, everybody who said no, did not have any reasonable point for removing the source and so there is no consensus about it.Tintor2 (talk) 22:01, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

And right there, you prove my point. Sephiroth called both good and bad, Zack called likeable and annoying. That is keeping the article neutral because it shows both sides. You are putting something up that has ONE side to it. That is not neutral, plain and simple. You say there are no other reliable sources, but have you even looked? I doubt it. And saying that nobody else's points on here is is reasonable is coming off as quite selfish. Axem Titanium has discussed with you at length with why it isn't needed. Kung-Fu Man said straight out that he felt that it was reaching to include them. Blake said it doesn't fit with the article nor the section that it was posted in. I've given you many reasons, the last of which is a major Wiki policy against putting stuff up about something that isn't even happening. Its starting to boil down with your arguments to just something that says "I just feel its important enough" and that's it. There's a consensus against keeping them in the articles, easily. If I have to, I will pull in some kind of administrator to deal with this. 68.55.153.254 (talk) 22:38, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

I already stated that I have looked in sites and no other reliable source has shown a casting. Users said that it doesn't fit, but without a valid reason, and just because it was a fan casting section. There's no reason why this source should be removed and I already explained above the reasons for the source: no "I just feel its important enough", it's just something that has never been used in the article, and it is not repeated stuff. The site doesn't say it is happening and just gives an opinion the author as every rewiew and feature article gives an opinion from its authors.Tintor2 (talk) 23:32, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Again, you're proving my point. It's not happening, it doesn't belong on Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. 68.55.153.254 (talk) 00:11, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

And again, that's the same as with all reviews. Some critics say that Cloud is one of the best characters in video games, but that's not something that was declared. Others say that they want Sora to be older in Kingdom Hearts III, but that also wasn't confirmed. The critics are just giving their opinions on the character and that's the same with the casting. They don't actually say that it's happening, just that such thing is their opinion, so it's not crystal ball.Tintor2 (talk) 01:15, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

This has got to be one of the worst cases of splitting hairs as I've ever seen. You're doing nothing but proving what I've said. You keep talking about things that people are talking about within context of games that have happened or are actually happening. A live action FF7 movie is NOT happening. That in violation of the crystal ball rule. No one but you has defended these links, that sounds like consensus to me. 68.55.153.254 (talk) 21:46, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

And once again, the source does not say it's happening so it's a violation. This is not about context of games, but about context of the character.Tintor2 (talk) 22:46, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

"Users said that it doesn't fit, but without a valid reason" why isn't our reasoning valid? The consensus seems to be against inclusion so you can't categorically declare the opposition's reasoning invalid without explaining why it's invalid. Axem Titanium (talk) 23:57, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Until now, the users' comments the source was not good, but not why. Another said that there is enough reception info, but if that's the case then why not remove another? Etc.Tintor2 (talk) 02:00, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

I must say that I can kinda understand both sides arguments, yet I am still leaning towards against the inclusion per WP:UNDUE. There seems to be very little talk about a live action movie, and one single source going all out to predict the casting seems to carry very little weight(thus undue) in sources. Especially, it would be also very hard to gain consensus on what casts should be used with no hard data, other sources might have different views thus listing one source for a cast is not very convincing. It could carry enough weight if more than one source stated the same cast (or another source supporting this source's view). —Preceding signed comment added by MythSearcher^talk 01:02, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

As I said before there's no other casting from a reliable source I have found, and I don't see why it should be removed as there's no other one. Moreover, it's not like the source repeats something already stated such as "Cloud's a good video game character", but something completely different: a comparison with real person.Tintor2 (talk) 02:00, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

The reason it should be removed (besides consensus) is that it's not neutral to provide only one reviewer's opinion on casting. You need multiple articles on the matter or it's simply one-sided. The commitment to stay neutral is stronger policy than a desire to add more information. If no other reliable sources exist, oh well. The marginal utility of including this "interesting tidbit" is outweighed by the disutility of losing neutrality. Axem Titanium (talk) 04:17, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Also, I think WP:TRIVIA is also a good pointer to these kind of info. —Preceding signed comment added by MythSearcher^talk 04:42, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Not really, considering that there is only source used Tifa's article that she should have been in the first Dissidia and only one source in Cloud about his ability with the sword.Tintor2 (talk) 15:06, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Yes, but that's a binary and the opposite is already true. No one's going to argue that Tifa shouldn't be in Dissidia because she's not in it anyway. It's impossible to argue that point because it's already the case. Therefore, it only requires one source to be neutral. These cases are apples and oranges with your case. Axem Titanium (talk) 16:53, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

The point of the article is just comparing Cloud with an actor. It does not state it's happening, so I don't violation of crystal ball or trivia, considering he is already compared with other characters in the same article. I'll give it a small rewrite.Tintor2 (talk) 17:14, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

First of all, the point of the article is not just comparing him to an actor, again, it's saying who should play him in a movie, not the same thing. And as said before, comparing Cloud to other characters within the Final Fantasy universe is a COMPLETELY different thing than comparing him to one out of thousands of actors in real life that have nothing to do with the FF universe where there are literally dozens of choices for who could play him, and just having one point of view and choice does not allow the article to stay neutral on the subject. 68.55.153.254 (talk) 21:24, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

But it still compares both of them. In a Final Fantasy X review article, the character of Tidus was described to be similar to famous actor Leonardo Dicaprio, and it counts as reception although it wasn't the article's point. Moreover, there are also thousand of video game characters, so I don't see what's the difference between such comparisons.Tintor2 (talk) 00:25, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

The Leo comparison was on looks and stopped there when describing the character in game. The whole point of the article that you have continually linked to was to discuss a hypothetical film. It says right in the title "Dream Casting" and the byline saying "We play casting director for a true film version of FFVII." For you to say that the whole point of the article was only to compare the characters to actors to just ludicrous. And using "there are thousands of video game characters" is not an argument when I specified that the comparisons were between characters with the FF universe, and made that perfectly clear. Moreover, those are comparisons that you brought up in the first place with Sephiroth/Kefka and Tidus/Squall. 68.55.153.254 (talk) 02:54, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

I did not say that was the point of the article, but that subject was covered. Do I need to repeat it? By the way, you were the first use as an argument "there are thousands of actors", and there is no reason not to include such comparison, as there is no reason not to include comparison between video game characters. Moreover, you accepted the comparison between Tidus and Dicaprio, and the 1UP comment was basically the same: similarities in looks and attitudes.Tintor2 (talk) 15:44, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

The heck you didn't say that. You said it three posts above my last response - "The point of the article is just comparing Cloud with an actor. It does not state it's happening, so I don't violation of crystal ball or trivia, considering he is already compared with other characters in the same article. I'll give it a small rewrite.Tintor2 (talk) 17:14, 11 October 2010 (UTC)" It looks like you are the one who needs to review what has been said. And yet again, the Leo/Tidus comparison was a superficial comparison made in passing if you actually read the article in context, which talks about Tidus' appearence within the game he first appears. The 1Up article is not the same thing when talking about making an actual live action movie out of game, a movie that is not happening at all. Either way, consensus is reached with no one but you actually defending this link for a week now, with several wiki policies being brought up against it, so I'm removing them. 68.55.153.254 (talk) 22:08, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

I meant that that was the point of using the article. There is no policy against it. As I said it a hundred times, the 1UP staff clarifies the movie isn't happening (moreover the word "fan casting" already states it's not official) so it doesn't violate crystall ball.Tintor2 (talk) 22:16, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Stop removing the sources. It does not violate trivia or undue as I rewrote them, with Vincent still compared with vampires, Barret not with Mr. T and Sephiroth's popularity (you actually made an edit conflict). I'm not really defending Aerith's considering, I couldn't rewrite it yet.Tintor2 (talk) 22:34, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

I think the only one objecting to the removal is you. Debates like this happen and it's inevitable that one finds oneself on the wrong side of consensus eventually. Please don't take it personally. Axem Titanium (talk) 23:10, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

And the reason for removal? I already stated above that I rewrote them to make them more in context.Tintor2 (talk) 23:13, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

WP:CONSENSUS, no one, not even one editor agreed with you, you are waging this one man war against at least 3 users and 1 IP user(with a fixed IP instead of socks) with 1 other user commented once against inclusion. also, your edits and reverts on the other related character articles without reaching consensus here can be considered as edit warring. —Preceding signed comment added by MythSearcher^talk 06:17, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Consensus but for what reason? Number of editors doesn't matter, but guidelines. The undue and trivia reasons were right, so that's why I rewrote the sentences to make them in context to the related paragraphs. However, the IP (with another IP) keeps removing them although there are more out of context sentences in the articles.Tintor2 (talk) 14:33, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

You can disagree that our reasoning is valid but you can't disagree that there's consensus that we believe in our arguments. We believe that the source in question is inappropriate for all the reasons above. I don't think you can spin the consensus any other way. Axem Titanium (talk) 16:42, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

That's why I rewrote them. To avoid such violations of undue and trivia. For example, Vincent's continues commenting about his vampire-like appearance, while Barret's mentions a differing opinion from all the comments about his similarities. Now it reads like any review comment shown in reception rather than a random mention. I just rewrote them to focus more in the character comments rather than a comparison with an actor, so I don't see how it is in violation of guidelines now.Tintor2 (talk) 19:29, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

You can rewrite them all you want, it will get to a point that you're actually changing the meaning of the article, which will be pointless. And it still doesn't matter how many times you rewrite it, until you find more than one comparison, it still is violating neutrality and undue. And there is still a consensus, and they will still be removed. 68.55.153.254 (talk) 23:19, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

The article's meaning was not changed, and it's not now undue considering it makes similar comments to the ones before (I already explained them above three or two times... and even in the edit comments...) so quit saying it violates such guidelines. As I see, there was a consensus for the previous state, but not the current one.Tintor2 (talk) 02:28, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Because you are not sticking to the source for the current edits. The source did not compare the characters and the actors, instead it is making comments why the author chose those actors without any comparison, most of it is just saying those are good matches and gave a few very personal views. This is not a comparison(not comparing the likes and differences using the same set of values) in any degree non-trivial. Also, I must state that this looks awfully like a primary source without ANY editorial oversight to me. —Preceding signed comment added by MythSearcher^talk 13:55, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

And that is comparison. Cloud was stated to have similar appearance to Pattinson, Vincent "the vampire comment", and Barret, a contrast from Mr. T. I don't get the trivia in this, considering the main point of using them in the article is giving more reception about them. Cloud is given a description just like IGN did it, Sephiroth was mentioned to be very popular within gamers, just like the other sources such as IGN, GameTrailers, etc. so it is not a primary source, just pure reception coming from a popular reliable source.Tintor2 (talk) 21:52, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

The Romaji translation "Kuraudo Storaifu" is questionable. I don't necessarily mean it's all wrong, but using any standard transliteration system (Hepburn, Nihon-shiki) I would feel much more comfortable with "Kuraudo Sutoraifu". Transliteration is often hard and there might be many possible ways to do it but I'd say with my JLPT lvl 3 that there's only a typo here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.130.8.142 (talk) 18:46, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Fixed. I'm not sure if it was changed or always has been like that, but good catch! WhiteArcticWolf (talk) 21:04, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

A few more sources that you might use for Reception

• http://www.empireonline.com/features/50-greatest-video-game-characters/default.asp?film=13
• http://uk.ign.com/videos/2012/03/27/64-buster-sword-final-fantasy-vii-igns-top-100-video-game-weapons
• http://www.gamezone.com/products/mortal-kombat/originals/top_five_mortal_kombat_crossover_characters_we_want_to_see
• http://www.complex.com/video-games/2012/01/the-50-best-video-game-easter-eggs-ever#13

And this one also for general sourcing of stuff: http://www.psu.com/a009541/In-the-Spotlight--Cloud-Strife

--Niemti (talk) 09:14, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

The reception section is already too crowded with three paragraphs talking about his role in FFVII so adding more top tens would make it confusing.Tintor2 (talk) 13:15, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Some of these see a lil trivial, such as mortal kombat candidates. But, it wont be that crowded. It would be nice to see this article to be featured.Lucia Black (talk) 03:51, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

The problem is in what paragraph and how to write them properly. There are already multiple sources in reception that talk about Cloud's personality, popularity and sword. Adding similar comments would make it repetitive.Tintor2 (talk) 04:21, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Recent changes to the article

FeEd7 (talk · contribs), you've been making a lot of changes to the article (which is an article already at WP:Good status), and I think it's safe to state that you are not a WP:Newbie. While some of your changes seem to be improvements at first glance, I'm not sure that all of them are. For example, with this edit, you changed "Irrespective of who accompanies Cloud at the Gold Saucer, a sufficiently high enough score with Tifa will result in a different scene playing out at the conclusion of disc two, suggesting greater intimacy between the two characters." to "Irrespective of who accompanies Cloud at the Gold Saucer, a high enough score with Tifa will affect a scene close to the game's conclusion, suggesting greater intimacy between the two characters." But in my opinion, the previous sentence is clearer that the scene changes. I also don't see why you are removing things like "the first disc" and "disc two." And with this edit you stated, "Nojima does not take credit for the Highwind scene at all." But if there are reliable sources stating or suggesting that he did, it's best to include both reports, per WP:Neutral...unless one of the reports is clearly false or does not have a lot of support in the literature about the topic.

It's been a long time since I played this game (I barely play video games anymore while my brothers still play them a lot); so I'm no longer as familiar with a lot of what you are changing. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 18:12, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

The appearances sections seem fine but I dont remember much of his creación.Tintor2 (talk) 14:54, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for replying, Tintor2; I was hoping you would. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 21:03, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Just a couple thoughts I had with some of the changes: Regarding the "disc one/two" thing, I was using other articles like Lightning (Final Fantasy) and other fictional character FAs as a template for style. Additionally, while the article does link to the Final Fantasy VII main article, it may not be clear to readers who haven't played the game (or even for those who haven't played for a very long time) what that even means. I suppose it's a bit analogous to something like "at the end of the first season" (like a TV show), but it just seems like something that would need explaining that isn't really relevant. All that being said, if there's a way to write it more clearly, by all means please edit it. My own concern with the way the sentence is written is that it's too ambiguous as-is, although the game itself is simply suggestive. Still, I'll be the first to admit that "greater intimacy" isn't great. As for the Nojima interview, from my reading of what he said, he claims that he didn't write either the rejected Highwind scene or the one present in the game, and that both were Kato's work. This also brings up something, though, that might need addressing down the line: From the way the sources were cited (e.g., pages 8–13), I assume past editors have been using translations found on places like Final Fantasy Citadel, which translate chunks of the guide books without giving specific page numbers. That may be fine, but I thought I should mention it here, too. FeEd7 (talk) 04:40, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

FeEd7, thanks for replying and explaining. Addressing the "disc one/two" thing, I think it's clearer and lets readers know exactly where those matters occur in the game. Like you stated, it's similar to using "In the first season/In the second season" type of wording. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 19:21, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

Sounds good. One other thought I had on that, though, and I haven't played them so I can't say: Do the PC and PS4 versions similarly break up the game, or otherwise indicate when those breaks occur? And if not, how should that be addressed? FeEd7 (talk) 21:53, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

Regarding the dark clothing and blue eyes bit, neither were mentioned anywhere else in the article, while in reception both his hair and sword have been noted as being iconic design elements. (Calling his eyes "striking" suggests to me that it's a reference to how characters, not critics, might react to them, although I don't even think that term is ever used in the script, just that they're referred to as a telltale sign of Mako exposure.) And, given that leads usually contain information found in the body of the article, my thought was to omit that information from a "less is more" perspective.

As for the main/protagonist distinction, yeah, that's a good point. FeEd7 (talk) 22:35, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 6 external links on Cloud Strife. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20130811115320/http://www.gamespot.com/greatest-video-game-hero/standings/index.html to http://www.gamespot.com/greatest-video-game-hero/standings/index.html
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090925062915/http://www.gamespot.com:80/psp/rpg/finalfantasyviiadventchildren/video/6227706? to http://www.gamespot.com/psp/rpg/finalfantasyviiadventchildren/video/6227706
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20160105162321/http://www.ugo.com/games/japanese-rpg-characters?page=5 to http://www.ugo.com/games/japanese-rpg-characters?page=5
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20071220022621/http://www.gametrailers.com:80/player/16889.html? to http://www.gametrailers.com/player/16889.html
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110629123257/http://ps2.ign.com/articles/688/688837p1.html to http://ps2.ign.com/articles/688/688837p1.html
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20091009023451/http://www.mania.com:80/10-male-headaches-anime_article_118033.html to http://www.mania.com/10-male-headaches-anime_article_118033.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 05:17, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

ugo.com links to a 404, manually editing it to redirect to http://web.archive.org/web/20131029212224/http://www.ugo.com/games/japanese-rpg-characters?page=5. FeEd7 (talk) 10:27, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

Starter character

I don't see any mention that Cloud is the starter character that the player uses in the original game or that even when the other party members are placed in front, Cloud's character is who moves around in the world. Is there a way to gently phrase that into the lead? Or is that what "main protagonist" means? He's not the starter character in all properties in FF7 as with Dirge of Cerberus and so forth? AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 02:18, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

I suppose one way of doing it would be just to say he "is a fictional character ... of Square's ..." (omitting the main protagonist bit) and then include a sentence after saying "he first appeared as a playable character and the main protagonist in Final Fantasy VII," etc. (Something like how it's written for Lightning (Final Fantasy).) When I've looked at other featured video game character articles, they usually just say that they're a playable character and a protagonist, though they don't usually mention whether or not they're the starter character. I will say that things like what character model show up on the field probably are covered by the fact that they're the protagonist, or belong in the game's article. FeEd7 (talk) 05:13, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Quotations in further development, moving concept/creation

So I did some digging, and it looks like the quotes and such about how Cloud "cracked" before Advent Children are taken from FLAREgamer's translation of staff interviews (http://flaregamer.com/b2article.php?p=109&more=1), although citation is made to the DVD. I reviewed the original source, and it appears FLAREgamer alternates between summarizing what was said or combining quotes, such that they're not in chronological order. I added timestamps to the citations I made in editing that section, so anyone should be able to review it now. I know we sometimes make reference to third party translations, but directly quoting them seems to me ill-advised.

I was also wondering what people thought about maybe moving concept and creation ahead of appearances, consistent with how most other fictional character pages do this, particularly those that are featured or A class. FeEd7 (talk) 04:46, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Cloud Strife. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110714232425/http://www.andriasang.com:80/e/blog/2011/07/13/ffvii_lbp2_pack/ to http://www.andriasang.com/e/blog/2011/07/13/ffvii_lbp2_pack/
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20100916212600/http://www.andriasang.com/e/blog/2010/09/15/flying_get/ to http://www.andriasang.com/e/blog/2010/09/15/flying_get/
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20100918094458/http://www.andriasang.com:80/e/blog/2010/09/16/square_enix_psp_push/ to http://www.andriasang.com/e/blog/2010/09/16/square_enix_psp_push/#post_comments

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 08:35, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

Dead links

Judgesurreal777, I reverted you here, per what WP:Dead links states about deleting dead links. And I reverted myself here. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 05:23, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

I'd love to recover them, but so far Internet Archive, Webcite and the custom Wikiproject Video games RS search haven't yielded these facts. By all means, take a crack at it. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 15:50, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

Judgesurreal777, as you may seen, ProtoDrake re-removed the material. I don't agree with the removals since WP:Dead links states, "Do not delete cited information solely because the URL to the source does not work any longer. WP:Verifiability does not require that all information be supported by a working link, nor does it require the source to be published online." But I'm not going to revert again. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 05:59, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

Also see Wikipedia:Link rot#Keeping dead links (a section of WP:Dead links). Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 06:01, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

If there was any hope of recovery I would agree, such as it being a print magazine that someone could find, or there was another web archive it was likely to be stored on. But in this case we seem to have neither, and I'm sure that as this article inevitably gets FFVII remake info a lot of holes in the development of the character will get filled. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 16:14, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Cloud Strife. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071011164522/http://ff7citadel.com/press/int_egm.shtml to http://www.ff7citadel.com/press/int_egm.shtml
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.gamespot.com/psp/rpg/finalfantasyviiadventchildren/video/6227706
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.gametrailers.com/player/16889.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3177896
• Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/6CjrtgZP4?url=http://www.gamasutra.com/view/pressreleases/68759/TOP_50_VIDEO_GAME_CHARACTERS_OF_ALL_TIME_ANNOUNCED_inGUINNESS_WORLD_RECORDS_2011_GAMERrsquoS_EDITION.php to http://www.gamasutra.com/view/pressreleases/68759/TOP_50_VIDEO_GAME_CHARACTERS_OF_ALL_TIME_ANNOUNCED_inGUINNESS_WORLD_RECORDS_2011_GAMERrsquoS_EDITION.php
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.1up.com/do/reviewPage?cId=3143876&did=1
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.1up.com/do/reviewPage?cId=3143876&did=1
• Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/611m8kvzA?url=http://www.1up.com/news/ffxiii-interview to http://www.1up.com/news/ffxiii-interview

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:30, 5 May 2017 (UTC)