User talk:Jonny2x4/Archive3

Street Fighter Alpha

• You need to use the preview function more. Your last two edits to this article have been, to put it mildly, lacking. JuJube 08:52, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

• • Sorry. I was half asleep when I made those edits. But you didn't have to rub it in my face either. Jonny2x4 16:53, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Art of Fighting

Johnny2x4 you are awesome, intelligent and FAST! I'm going to give you a nice copyedit now (and a brisk shoulder massage too, keep the warm wet towel on your head). ~ Otterpops 20:45, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback. I've been working on rewriting most of these fighting game articles (especially those from SNK and Capcom) and the Art of Fighting article was one that needed alot of work. I thinking of merging List of minor Art of Fighting characters into the main article, since most of it is just backstory and trivia. Also, which do you think is better as a cover art for the infobox image. The cover of AoF1 for Neo-Geo or the AoF Anthology cover for PS2? I think the former is a better representive of the game's era, while the latter is better to represent the entire series. Jonny2x4 21:15, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Regarding the Poison article

I disagree with your reasons for moving them as info from said article comes from official info by capcom, and that the only two statements regarding merging it with the List of Final Fight characters were in fact against the motion. Said List should (in my opinion) be reserved for characters that serve little to no actual significance in the storyline save for quick tidbits or their weight in the actual games, not a character that has appeared in three separate games and was set up to appear in a fourth, and whose storyline is tied up with several other Street Fighter related characters such as Hugo and Cody. I've opted to undo your redirect once again, but will give Danny Lilithborne a shout about the article given he's primarily the one that seems to have some final say on the articles as a whole, and see if he agrees with your standpoint. I ask that you at least be patient, or at least come up with some concrete reasoning as to crowd an already very crowded page with some extra info on this character. Thanks for your time and patience, I look forward to your response.--Kung Fu Man 06:53, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

To put it quite bluntly (as with most Street Fighter/Final Fight-related articles), that Poison article sucks. It's mostly an in-universe biography of the character, accompanied by a self-contradictory debate on whether the character has a penis or not and a useless trivia section. Aside from a few leads, it ignores the fact that Poison was mostly just a video game character who went from being a common enemy character in a popular side-scrolling beat-em-up, to a playable character in an obscure and unpopular fighting game, to merely an NPC in the Street Fighter III series. She's not really that revelant of a character outside Capcom fandom. The write-up in the List of Final Fight characters pretty much says the same thing in less than two paragraps. Jonny2x4 07:09, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Well let's see....rewriting that so it's out-of-universe was actually not very hard at all. Hey, I'm half awake and I was able to do it. Cleared up some of the fan contradiction in the Controversy section and fomatted it a bit more to be more of an article rather than a footnote. The main problem with the character and controversy is, if you had read about some, the fact that capcom loves to contradict themselves over the matter to either just stir up the water or because Capcom USA and Capcom Japan get their wires crossed. You also overlooked the entire fact that this happens to be the only character of this nature in Capcom's Street Fighter canon (especially since Roxy is now changed to being female in the last story revision), and while that's not a big matter for me I'm pretty sure that's significant for someone. Now, with all that taken care of and information there actually factual from capcom's own design info as researched by Tiamat, I think that's it mainly other than waiting out for your second merge proposal and seeing who agrees with it if anyone and going from there.

As it stands, if anything needs cleanup and some splitting about, it's the oversized List of FF chars, which is a pain to wade through and already creating warnings due to size when one goes to edit it.--Kung Fu Man 15:57, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

I only did the Final Fight list because they were too many stub-like Final Fight character articles that basically just reiterate what little plot the game, providing only a brief one/two-phrase description of the character. It's more of a temporary fix than a permanent solution. Honestly, there's not much you can say about Carlos, Dean, Lucia, Kyle and all the other Final Fight characters appearing in the sequels outside of the games themselves. The only notable characters are the ones appearing multiple games, and almost all of them just happens to be from the original Final Fight (the most popular installment). Basically they need to be merge with with their proper article as opposed to being maintained in an overcrowded list. Affter doing that, I'll probably dismantle the list.

As for Roxy being female now, I think that may had been more of a mistranslation from whoever translated the CCC profiles than a genuine story revision.Jonny2x4 02:31, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Welcome to the problem of capcom retcons: what they say one time may not be true down the line, and you have something else stated another time. There's really nothing at this point coming after that that's canon counteracting what was said in CCC that Roxy is male. The fact that she's also stated there to disprove of Poison's crossdressing makes it further likely it was a retcon and not a goof (that had to be one heck of a mistranslation, and if it wasn't and she is a man, there's no solid explaination for her crossdressing if she disproves of it soundly O_o). When you get into "this or that may be mistranslated"...you get problems galore. Basically IMHO it's best to stick with "it is this" until they come back around and state otherwise.

As for the Final Fight article, a few bits of that could easily be split off for their own article, but not many. Specifically talking about the Andore and both Belgers (combine their bits into one article). Rolento's troops could be spliced into his own article, and everyone else moved to their respective games they came from in that one. Dean and Lucia have jack to support themselves as solo articles other than they were support characters. Carlos...I'd recommend leaving as while he was a support character, he does have a bit more ties to the other FF characters moreso than the previous two (hell, some SF3 characters have less bio info than him). Kyle wins out only because he's a game's lead protagonist, as it stands that article could be expanded a lot for him easily. So way I see it, only the two FF3 support characters are really the dead weight and as it stands forgotten by capcom at this point entirely. What do you think?--Kung Fu Man 03:30, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure the Super Famicom Final Fight manual says that Roxy is indeed a cross dressing buddy of Poison and states something that Roxy doesn't really like being a cross dresser himself, but merely does it out of his admiration for Poison. But since I don't have manual myself right now, I'll refrain from writing that right now. I'm surprised they even gave Roxy a backstory, considering she's the only palette/head-swap enemy to have one.

I don't really consider biographical data and character connections to be concrete enough to sustain a stand-alone character. If you're familiar with Capcom (not just Street Fighter, but also Mega Man and Resident Evil), you'll know that many of their back stories are filled with superfluous character connections. In Resident Evil, you have the rivarly between HUNK and Nicholai, as well as Alexia and Birkin, and the friendship between Leon and Kevin, even though none of those characters ever appeared in a game together. Anyway, Carlos' connection to Guy is mostly just trivia and if you remove it from his back story, it doesn't really affect the gameplay of Final Fight 2 that much. Andore and Hugo could be merged, since they're essentially the same character with differet names. Kyle, again there's not much you can say about him to sustain a stand-alone article without reiterating the plot. I rewrote Maki (Final Fight) to suit a real world's perspective. It really irked me that her appearance in the GBA Alpha 3 was given precedence over CvS2, even though the only reason why she was in Alpha 3 was because of CvsS2. Tell me what you think.

BTW, what do you think of the presence of Shinkiro's artwork in Street Fighter articles? I really like his art style, but I don't think it's suitable since he's mostly associated with SNK anyway (even though he's with Capcom now). Jonny2x4 04:41, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Yeah you might ultimately have a point there about Carlos in the long run. Guess there it bugs me Maki only gets a page solely because of her token appearance in CvS2 and SFA3 MAX which really amounted to squat. Kyle, the only problem I have is he's stuck with the fate of being the protag of the game, but still he really doesn't *do* anything outside of the plot like you said, and it's doubtable we'll be seeing him again. Andore and Hugo...you might have a problem there. The Andore bit in the list covers all family members, and at least one of them is still hanging around Metro City as shown in streetwise (what Hugo's article never really explains is while he's obviously of the Andore family, he may not actually be one of the family members you fight. He sure as heck doesn't act like Andore Jr. in FFR). So I'd still say give the Andore's their own full article covering all the family members save for Hugo in one fell swoop and just add a "see also" regarding Hugo's relation.

I agree though, Shinkiro's artwork doesn't belong in these articles. He really doesn't make the characters look like their capcom artworks, and has some obsession with making faces even female resemble George Clooney. They should be swapped out for more suitable images.--Kung Fu Man 05:36, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

It's not so much Shinkiro's style itself that bothers me. Shinkiro is one of my favorite video game artists as a matter of fact. It's just that his style is identified as "SNK Groove" in the game than "Capcom Groove" and I much rather use official art from the Street Fighter games to represent Street Fighter characters anyway.

Anyway, I don't see any point of giving Andores and Hugo seperate articles. Again there's not much you can say about the Andores as whole other than they're just basically palette-swap of the same guy. Likewise, there's not much you can say about Hugo by himself, other than he's based on a Final Fight character. But together, you have one concise article.

In fact, alot of these Street Fighter articles need good cleaning up as a matter of fact. I think Maki could be merged into the Final Fight 2 article, since there's not much to say about her appearances outside that game. Jonny2x4 03:33, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, just read Tiamat's guide a bit closer about the Hugo Andore, so I think I'll agree with you that the Andores should be merged with that article. Given Hugo's the prominent one of the bunch, it'd be better to just make his family a subsection like Rolento's troops should be a subsection of his article. I'll also add I have an unholy hatred for Streetwise at this point. Maki, well, the article might be able to be expanded somewhat with the right work, I really think one should hold off on merging it looking at it closer. With that resolved, I'm still going to disagree with merging the Poison article. Are we at least in agreement there that one gets to stay? Also, what about the suggested Belger solo article? Does it sound like a good idea to you?--Kung Fu Man 08:06, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Okay, how's it In-Universe now?--Kung Fu Man 04:43, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Because it spends too much time reiterating the character's entire backstory along with the plot of the game with little or no mention of her role as a character in the game and covers the games in chronological order, as opposed to an actual real-world order (SF3 came first, not FF Revenge). Just mentioning each games' title as a lead in a paragraph isn't enough. If you want to see some example articles on how to write a good out-of-universe article, see Sonic the Hedgehog and Solid SnakeJonny2x4 05:03, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Here's a better idea: how about instead of slapping in-universe, cleanup or whatever else your heart desires, and instead lending a hand in actually tidying up what you might see as problematic a lot more. You want it fixed, lend a hand. Heck, I have NO CLUE what else to remove from the Street Fighter 2010 article without reducing it to a stub: there isn't squat for it with your ideals, and at this point I've practically rewritten the whole thing (hell, when I first found it it still said Kevin was Ken). Removing last names from articles just because you don't deem them as common is not lending a hand with anything, nor is it correct: if you want uniformity like that, hit EVERY movie character that has never had their last name stated on film, every other video game character that has not had a full name stated, and go from there. I tried collaborating with you, you didn't respond, I went ahead with what I thought was the best recourse and some of the things you suggested. Now as a result you gripe for example about the Streetwise article being too long. You might as well reduce every article here on a character's gameplay with footnotes on how they were in the story because quite basically that seems to be the only direction all this is heading and I'm getting more than a little tired of playing rewrite-it-and-wait-to-see-if-the-guy-agrees with you.--Kung Fu Man 05:13, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

I appologize for the blowup...I've been trying to get that article to at least be somewhat concrete for a bit now and it's just exhausting to have to guess around a lot. I see what needs to be done to rewrite the Poison and Belger articles, but you might be on your own about some of the others: either be more direct and help clean up what bothers you or the tags are meaningless. Oh, and I am adamant about those names. See my reasoning on the Ken Masters discussion page Please.--Kung Fu Man 05:30, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

You're right. You need to settle down there. No need to get all personal in here. Many of these video game characters have enough backstory to maintain stand-alone articles. But Wikipedia's standards states that backstory/plot summaries should be kept to a minimum and that fictional characters should be viewed from a real world perspective. Anyway, let's clear up each topic point by point.

• About full names as article's titles - It wasn't my idea, but rather enforced by another user. There's a discussion going on about it in the series' talk page. But from my understanding, common names are preferred. To use a real person's example, Madonna's real name is Madonna Ciccone. But the article's name is Madonna, not Madonna Ciccone. The Final Fantasy characters often have their full names promoted in merchandises and instruction manuals (and even in the end credits). There doesn't seem to be a standarized naming convetion for video games.

• About the Street Fighter 2010 article. It's not so much what needs to be removed, but rather what needs to be added as well. It centers too much around the plot of the game and doesn't even include a gameplay section. Not to much the article seems to center primarily around the Japanese version of the game, rather than the English localization. Regardless of which version is the "true" one, chances are that an English speaking gamer is gonna play the version of the game where the character is named "Ken" and not "Kevin".

• The Final Fight articles really need a good cleanup, each of them. For example, not every character needs its own sub-section. Just make an extensive sub-section listing everyone and if you can't do that, spin-off a separate game-specific character lists. A good example would be List of Metal Gear Solid characters.

There's more, but I'll discuss them in their individual talk pages for the future. Right now, I'm cleaning up the Resident Evil characters articles. Jonny2x4 06:35, 20 January 2007 (UTC) Jonny2x4 06:35, 20 January 2007 (UTC) Okay, sorry to bug you again, but I *think* I've got the Poison article down now...and oddly enough it actually made it larger because I forgot to add some things o.O' This ultimately is everything that can possibly be said about the character that is factual though.--Kung Fu Man 07:59, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

It's a good start. It still needs a bit of improvement/cleaning up, but otherwise it's a bit more informative than the previous version of the article. You might want to suggest a peer review for the article and see what others have to say.Jonny2x4 08:10, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Already requested. I probably wait and see where this one goes from here before I bother with the other articles. Mind if the in-universe tag gets removed now or want to keep it there?--Kung Fu Man 08:28, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Do so if you wish. It's no longer too in-universe at least. Jonny2x4 08:40, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

A minor thing that's been bugging me about these articles for a bit. Can you dig up any citations for the following or at least state points where they're mentioned so I can whip one up?

• Just where in Mighty Final Fight it states Poison Kiss is Poison's sister
• Where "Horace" is mentioned for Belger in Streetwise
• Where Black is mentioned to be "Marshal Black"

I'm guessing you were the one to add the last two to the List of FF chars, problem is for these 3 bits I can't find anything online or in what I have that states that stuff (at least that I can see in what I have...too much stuff x.X') Anyway, not needing an immediate reply, just gimme a shout when you get the time.--Kung Fu Man 18:12, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

• According to Street Fighter Retsuden and the Red Cyclone (both well-known Japanese fan-sites), they state that Poison Kiss from Mighty Final Fight is not the same character as Poison. I'm guessing their sources must be the Japanese instruction manuals for the game. The characters from Mighty all had completely different names from their adult counterparts too (i.e: Gale instead of Bred, Tequila of El Gado, ect.). While I don't like to rely on secondary sources like Tiamat's FAQ or fansites, it's better than nothing I presumed.

• I had no friggin idea where Belger's full name (I haven't gotten around to playing Streetwise yet) and Black's rank came from . They were added by someone else. For that matter, I don't even know where the Morgan from Lucia Morgan came from. At the very least I do know Rolento's full name from the Zero 2 Secret File and Maki has been referred as Genryusai Maki in a strategy guide, but those full names never been mentioned elsewhere.Jonny2x4 20:38, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

The vs series (marvel vs and capcom/snk vs) are not considered canon, so that's why it was out of order in terms of the article (it was under Non-Canon Appearances, which is true). Your original draft lacked quite a bit of info, namely her storyline in SFA3 MAX (while Double Upper is indeed made by Crawfish, the appearance in MAX is by capcom and canon, much like Ingrid and whatnot despite how little it makes sense...), design change bits were left out between games, and other things which would have made the article to someone 'not in the know' very confusing and possibly uninformative. I *do* agree however that I wrote some sections too in-universe and plan to rewrite those bit and add the gameplay section, so I added an in-universe tag to the article. I really don't plan to leave that as is that's for certain.

The Dean and Lucia articles are going to be merged with the original FF3 page though, as will Carlos's for FF2: I've dug pretty deep and all I've managed to find was scraps, so those two will be kaput. Just explaining where I'm going with the Maki article so it actually has some purpose on Wikipedia.--Kung Fu Man 04:33, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Canon schamon. You're putting a bit too much priority on her fictional storyline and other bits of trivia and not enough on her role as a video game character. True, she does have a storyline in Alpha 3 MAX, but that's besides the point. Without the existance Capcom vs. SNK 2, she wouldn't had been in the portable versions of Alpha 3 in the first place and I think the article should reflect on this fact, rather than marginalizing her appearance in that game because of its canonity.

Good point, but there are ways to express that her CvS2 appearance led to the one in SFA3 MAX without just completely disregarding that part. I'll try and add something to that in a short bit here to reflect that.

Besides, keeping track of Street Fighter canon seems to be a futile attempt anyway. The games only follow a loose continuity according Capcom, which why there seems to be some many "retcons". Most of them are not genuine retcons, but merely inconsistencies between games (i.e: the whole Rolento being in Mad Gear thing in FFight2).

Capcom has too many cooks over one pot. SFA2 was made by one bunch, FF2 another. Still with retcons there's a simple rule: whatever game that's part of the actual storyline that came next can override stuff from the first. This is how Charlie doesn't actually get killed until SFA3, or similar events: one just precedes over the other. The canon is the official storyline for this stuff, and if friggin MK folks can maintain it (holy COW are there a lot of retcons there), so can we.--Kung Fu Man 05:01, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

This is why these should follow a real world order than an in-universe order.Jonny2x4 04:52, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

GAH! Don't even bring up the Mortal Kombat articles. Those are examples of the kind of articles we should avoid, rather than follow. Most of it are a convoluted inuniverse mess and doesn't even cover the real world tangentially. Look at Johnny Cage and Noob Saibot. Does it mention anywhere that the only reason for Johnny Cage's omission in MK3 was due to the firing of the actor who played him? Does it mention that Noob Saibot was originally conceived as a separate character before being revealed to be the Older Sub-Zero?

Now look at Solid Snake. It provides a conprehensive real world perspective, covering the progress of the character with only small bits of plot summaries, including Snake's Revenge. Notice than even though Snake's Revenge is not a canonical game, it's in the main body of the article because its existence led to the creation of Metal Gear 2. That's the kind of idea I want to convey in the Maki article. Jonny2x4 05:31, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Haha, I was joking, relax. Hm though...putting Capcom Vs SNK 2's appearance up above SFA3 would make some sense given it does factor in like you say. (Usually non-canon appearances like that one manga amount to a hill of beans in the long run, but this one make sense). Alright, I'll rewrite that.--Kung Fu Man 05:35, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Rolento

• Thanks for the citation. :) JuJube 02:12, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Hideki Kamiya

• Despite what you seem to think, I never proposed deletion of this article. I tagged it as being of questionable notability, which I think it is. The subject may in fact be notable, but the article does not demonstrate that. The notability tag I placed on the article, asks that, if you think Hideki Kamiya is notable, then you add citations demonstrating that fact. Please do so. If you cannot find written sources about him, then he is very unlikely to be notable, and deletion should be considered. However, I would not propose deletion until there had been ample time for his notability to be established. No harm meant.Lesnail 14:30, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

• • Isn't the interview I provided in the external links section enough? That's an officially published news source where they discuss his work. If the fertilizer salesman who made Manos: The Hands of Fate gets his own Wikipedia article, then I think that someone who made two of Capcom's popular game franchise deserves one too. Jonny2x4 16:20, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Oy

Since you decided I apparently didn't know what I was doing and moved the Firebrand article back, guess I should fill you in. Red Arremer seems to actually be the exact race of the little buggers. Firebrand as far as I can tell was just the name of one of the critters, and I planned to rewrite the article to reflect it was about that one, and make the info about Red Arremer's secondary much like some of the Darkstalkers char pages contain info on their races (though by god does all of that need a rewrite). Also, wikipedia uses the US names for such things as far as I've been informed, and the only case where the exact character wasn't reffered to as Firebrand in a US game was SvC: Chaos, and that game wasn't even by Capcom which really makes it a little iffy to count towards this.

Just explaining this so I can make sure you're fine with what I had planned before I move ahead with it. Oh, and sorry about the Namco/Temco thing regarding the image...it was in the wee hours of the morning, and my mind was shot: I honestly did mean to put Temco :P--Kung Fu Man 03:33, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Uh no. First of all, as you already know, the name Firebrand was only used in the English localizations of the Gargoyle's Quest games and the translation refers to him as a "gargoyle" (for censorship reasons) rather than a "Red Arremer". The idea that Firebrand being a specifically named Red Arremer is just fanwankery, which has no room here.

The credits of Super Ghouls 'n Ghosts refers to him by Red Arremer [1], as does Capcom Classics Collection and SVC Chaos as you said (although I do remember that prototype versions of the game used the Firebrand name). They only changed his name for the Gargoyle's Quest games. In the case of an inconsistency, the more common or popular name is preferred and Gargoyle's Quest games are only tangential to the Ghost 'n Goblins series. It's the same reason why we have an article named Sodom instead of "Katana (Street Fighter)". Jonny2x4 04:11, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

First off the Sodom change was one done by Capcom down the line themselves. You're overlooking the fact we still use M. Bison for the dictator, Balrog for the Boxer, and Vega for the assassin, instead of the japanese naming convention. The name as of yet has not been retconned to Red Arremer, and I could easily cite the fact that he retained the name for three games while there were still little beasties in the GnG games called Red Arremers in the credits. If it isn't a name, wouldn't they have just called them all Firebrand in those games instead? I'm going with the flat out logic here and saying that isn't an incosistency despite your point of view. There isn't anything stating otherwise (though if Capcom re-releases these games in one of their collections with the name as Red Arrermer, I will personally fix it and eat my humble pie in peace, but as it stands we have to go with what we know for fact atm :\)--Kung Fu Man 04:24, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Actually, the Sodom change was because Nintendo enforced the removal of any biblical references (not to mention the name Sodom is closely tied to sodomy), but that's besides the point.

He kept his original name in the Ghost 'n Goblins series (up until Ultimate anyway), but was changed to Firebrand in the English localization of a spinoff trilogy that's barely half as revelant as his original appearance. As far as Capcom is concerned, he was an enemy character in Ghosts 'n Goblins first and the protagonist of Gargoyle's Quest second. If he got his name changed to Firebrand in the Ghosts 'n Goblins games, then you would've a case. But as it stands, that isn't the case at all. Since Red Arremer is his more common name, then the article's name should reflect that. To cite another example, it's the reason why we have Princess Peach as the article's primary name instead of Princess Toadstool.

The English localization of Gargoyle's Quest doesn't negate the possibility of Firebrand being a specifically named "Red Arremer" like you said, but it DOESN'T support it either. You're just basically putting original research/fanwankery into the article by saying that "Firebrand is a specifically named Red Arremer".

And for the record, STOP referring to every piece of name change or inconsistency as a "retcon". There is a big difference between the two.Jonny2x4 05:17, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

I actually meant Capcom called him Sodom in the SFA games, putting an end to the Katana stuff. And might I point out that name changes tend to occur frequently in some games (ExDeath -> X-Death -> Exdeath) and wikipedia adapted for each name. WHen information about something changes, that's a retcon, though it's best to make sure it's mentioned in more than one spot frequently enough (which is why Red Devil isn't sticking) or comes straight from the horse's mouth. The thing that gets me though is that he had that name for three whole games but I'm fairly certain the character was called Red Arremer in the SNES port of Ghouls 'n Ghosts, something which I will have to check. But I'm pretty certain Red Arremer is the name of the race itself (explaining the ranks like Ace while we're at it) and that the R.A. in the Gargoyle's quest games is one particular one.

Either way, I'm going to do some more research on this...you're right that there isn't enough to support it either way, so I'll be as certain as possible pretty much.--Kung Fu Man 05:31, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Minor thing btw: your example with Peach kinda tanks out for this one here, because Peach is now the official US name, not Toadstool any longer. No such instance exists here.--Kung Fu Man 05:54, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

True, Red Arremer is the name of a fictional race of demons in the GnG games, but it is also the name of the individual character in the Japanese versions of the Gargoyle's Quest games. It's the same reason why there's a bunch of Yoshis in the Mario games and then one specific Yoshi who is close friends with Mario. Like you said, they did renamed the character "Firebrand" in the English Gargoyle's Quest, but not once did they referred to him as "Firebrand, the Red Arremer" in the games.

A retcon is NOT a name change by the way. A retcon is an intentional change in a previously published story often done to FIX an inconsistency. Inconsistent name changes between translations are not deliberate and often the result of the translator of one version being unaware of a previously existing translation or simply because they preferred one way to transliterate a name over another (it's the reason why Ryu Hayabusa's father from Ninja Gaiden is referred as Joe in the Xbox Ninja Gaiden and why they called Ryu's lover Aileen instead of Irene in the Dead or Alive backstory). I'm pretty sure whoever localized the ending credits of Super GnG overlooked the fact they changed Red Arremer's name to Firebrand in Gargoyle's Quest (because they did change Samael's name to Sardius, so it's not as if everyone kept their original name either).Jonny2x4 16:32, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

True, true, which is why keeping track of all this is a pain.

Although, I did find something interesting in this transcript of the Demon's Crest manual. It has the character's name Firebrand, but he is referred to as "the Red Demon" (note the capitals and the) on page 7 of the manual, and in many cases in the manual's text is "red demon", which wouldn't bug me except they called the Arremers "Red Devils" in Ultimate GnG, which would be a change to coincide with this a bit. I'm going to dig a bit deeper, but this does give the point a bit more standing I'd hope.

Sorry too if I'm being a pain in the ass about this stuff, I just would prefer the record be straight for good and all that good jazz rather than having folks be misinformed one way or another.--Kung Fu Man 13:26, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Well here's this too: the Gargoyle's Quest manual transcript, which says "Red Gargoyle" in it with the appropriate capitals, though the manual for GQII is kinda useless in that regard save for saying he's a gargoyle named Firebrand. Still, this should be enough proof here that it's a actual name, right?--Kung Fu Man 13:34, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Just a nudge as I'm still waiting for your response on this stuff before I move forward with anything.--Kung Fu Man 16:31, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

I still say leave it as Red Arremer. Those evidences are not sufficient enough. If you still want to argue about it, just take it to WP:RM. Jonny2x4 16:59, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Patriots (Metal Gear)

It's up for AFD again, thought you'd like to know

†he Bread ³⁰⁰⁰ 22:48, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Akuma (Street Fighter)

• Please do not deliberately introduce incorrect information into articles. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. JuJube 05:40, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Except for the fact that it's NOT INCORRECT. Ansatsuken IS NOT a proper martial name. It's a generic term referring any martial arts made for killing. Event the ansatsuken article mentions. Jonny2x4 05:50, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

The statistics section should list what Capcom has for the martial art, not fan's interpretations of what they say. JuJube 06:07, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

And what's YOUR source that Ansatsuken is the officially recognized name of the martial arts style used by Akuma? If anything, YOU'RE the one adding fancruft. Jonny2x4 06:12, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

As you said yourself, "Ansatsuken" is a general term for martial arts designed to kill. As it is perfectly generic, it's appropriate to list; I'm not claiming Ansatsuken is a particular style. "Assassination arts taught by Goutetsu", on the other hand, isn't listed anywhere and is fancruft. The only valid compromise here would be leaving the fighting style off entirely, which is seemingly the way things are leading due to the ridiculous arguments against using Tiamat's well-done documentation. JuJube 01:07, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

My main problem is that simply listing "Ansatsuken" is completely misleading, since it's more of a categorization than a specific style. Gen's style is also an Ansatsuken (Soryu and Kiryu), but it's not the same Ansatsuken as Akuma's style.
Either way, the article is in need of a complete rewrite (i.e: covering the character from an OOU perspective) instead of arguing whether it's Ansatsuken or Goutetsu-style Ansatsuken. Tiamat's guide might be well documented and covered, but it's not a completely reliable source as far as WP:V is concerned and we don't need a plot guide for every character. Jonny2x4 02:18, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Devil May Cry

Hey there I recently suggested the creation of a new WikiProject based on Devil May Cry, and I was wondering if you might be interested in supporting us, if you are please sing the Interested Wikipedians section on the Devil May Cry entry here, thanks for your time. -Dark Dragon Flame 01:41, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Dante's In-Universe tag

As I noted on the talk page, I'm thinking it's time to reconsider the in-universe tag, which you first added. What do you think of the page's status now? --Boradis 20:37, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

It still needs alot of improvement, but at the very least the plot summary has been reduced to a decent point. Either way, I removed the game-specific sub-sections and added critical commentary, as well as the basis of Dante's character design (something none of you did, even though it's more important to the article if we want to achieve a real world perspective). Also, why do you guys keep insisting on mentioning Deadshot. It's a non-notable phone game distributed only in Japan and isn't even mentioned in the official DMC website in Japan. [Japan.http://tomcat.capcom.co.jp/search/gameindex.php?NUTITLEID=20050113143739] Jonny2x4 23:41, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the improvements. If none of us did something though, it was because we weren't aware of it and where to cite it from. No point telling us our priorities are wrong if we didn't have the information. Thank you for finally adding it, since you've mentioned it before. I added Deadshot back in because in the cites I had for it here and here it's listed as TBA, not Japan-only. But about the In-Universe tag specifically: What else should be done to make you happy with the article in THOSE TERMS? Not in other areas, simply in terms of being In-Universe. Also, do you think you could straighten out the references section? It was fine before your latest updates, and I don't know what happened to it. --Boradis 00:17, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Never mind on the references section. I found the problem, an unclosed ref tag. --Boradis 00:29, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Either way, I think the article is much better know, even though it still need some improvements (i.e: a better lead). You might want to put a request for Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Assessment. To see other editors' opinion about it. Jonny2x4 01:28, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Cool, that's exactly what I'm gonna do. --Boradis 03:30, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Ansatsuken

• What, did you think I would forget if enough time passed by? I removed your "clarifications" again. And don't get me started on those long paragraphs you tried to jam into the picture captions. JuJube 04:53, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

• • Jesus. Didn't you even bother keeping the credits to the original artists at least. From what I gather from every Japanese Street Fighter fansites I've visited, the term Ansatsuken only applies to Gouki's style, and not the style used by Ryu and Ken themselves (which is based on Ansatsuken). I would like to see an officially-published source that says otherwise.Jonny2x4 05:16, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
    • Ansatsuken is not the name of Gouki's fighting style. It is not the name of a fighting style at all. It's a generic Japanese term used to refer to any fighting style used by assassins. And I think an official book (such as Street Fighter Eternal, which lists the fighting style as simply "Ansatsuken") trumps fansites. As for the name of the artists, just put the name of the artist. Don't describe the pictures of Ryu and Ken in detail. I hate revert wars, so I'll leave it to you to find this information out. But I intend to change it back tomorrow afternoon if it isn't done yet. JuJube 05:37, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
    • By the way, don't think I hate you or anything. Sorting through the plethora of contradictory Street Fighter information is a royal pain in the patootie. That's why I'm thankful there are books like Street Fighter Eternal to clean through the mess. ^_^ JuJube 05:39, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Twelve (Street Fighter)

• Nope, that art is definitely by Falcoon (my friend has a poster with that artwork in his room). But that leads me to ask why the art is there at all; Falcoon does official art for KOF but there's nothing official about his drawings in regards to Street Fighter. JuJube 05:27, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

• • Actually, I've replaced with the official 3rd Strike rendition by Ikeno. It supposes to show up on your PC. If not, try to refresh it. Anyway, Falcoon was never officially commisioned by Capcom as far as I know, so it's technically fanart (albeit, professional fanart). Jonny2x4 03:25, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
    • I see it now. ^_^ JuJube 03:32, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Survey Invitation

Hi there, I am a research student from the National University of Singapore and I wish to invite you to do an online survey about Wikipedia. To compensate you for your time, I am offering a reward of USD$10, either to you or as a donation to the Wikimedia Foundation. For more information, please go to the research home page. Thank you. --WikiInquirer 01:48, 17 March 2007 (UTC)^{talk to me}

Informal mediation

Wikipedia:Mediation_Cabal/Cases/2006-12-21_Street_Fighter_character_articles has been reopened by request. Please join in the discussion so we can finalize a compromise acceptable to all parties. Vassyana 22:27, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-12-21 Street Fighter character articles has been closed. When reopened, a clear strong consensus was displayed, with very few and limited objections to the consensus. Unanimous assent is not required for consensus. A supermajority supports the previous compromise and is unwilling to further accomodate the dissenting view. Therefore, I have closed the mediation accordingly. If you have any questions, comments or concerns, you may address them on my talk page. Vassyana 17:03, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

E. Honda

• I removed the movelist. There's plenty of precedent for this; movelists have been removed from Remy (Street Fighter), Yang (Street Fighter) and Oro (Street Fighter) in the past. JuJube 01:52, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

• • The Japanese Wikipedia has them, I don't know why the English one has them removed. The article as it is right now is just plot-cruft and makes no mention of the character's gameplay style. As long as the move list isn't an indiscriminate game-by-game list of every move he has, I think it could a worthy addition.Jonny2x4 04:12, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

• • BTW, there's entire articles dedicated to the Hadoken, Shoryuken and the Tatsumaki Senpuukyaku and some of them have redundant content or written from an in-universe perspective. I don't see why Honda can't have a simple move list. Jonny2x4 07:45, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

KoF posters

No, I'm not sure about hardly any of those posters. I just pick images I saw that seemed the most "poster-like". You seem to be finding better images though, so thanks for that.--SeizureDog 05:38, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Stealth game

Good call on changing the name of the page, I'd been thinking about doing that for some time. --Ubersuntzu 03:47, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Nash

Sorry for my stupid/arrogant behaviour during the discussion. I guess I was just too compulsive about this whole thing. You know the "rules" here much better than I do. The next time I'll pay more attention to your comments. Thanks, 1stLtLombardi 07:07, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Maki Blood Type

I'll have to do some rechecking of it but Maki's blood type was in there based off FF2 last I checked. Not really a major issue, but the point of the reference was some fool was going around changing the bloodtypes, and a reference seemed to kill that.

Metal Gear Solid FAR

Metal Gear Solid has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here.

Don't suppose if you recall if SFA3 MAX listed it in her bio by any chance...I'd actually have to rummage through the game for that again, though if it does that is at least a citable source no?

Oh, and wb.--Kung Fu Man 06:00, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

I would have to check the game right now to see, but I'm busy with other stuff. I'll check it later. Jonny2x4 07:26, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Message from a human!

Hi, Jonny. Sorry for clogging up your page with so many boilerplate template messages. I was going through the article List of classic Metal Gear characters, and tagging the images that didn't have a rationale. I was using a special tool, which meant that every time I tagged an image, an automatic message was sent to the person who had uploaded it. It so happened that an awful lot of images from that page (possibly all of them) had been uploaded by you, so that's how that happened. Apologies for any irritation. Cheers. ElinorD (talk) 13:32, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Your recent edits

Jonny, please stop tagging Banderstiz's articles as nonsense. These are not cases of vandalism by any means, nor are these articles "patent nonsense". (Please read WP:CSD#G1 for a definition of the term.) These are articles that make a specific claim of notability, and are thus inappropriate for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Caknuck 18:25, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry to say this, but you're wrong. All of his articles are filled with nothing but unsourced hoaxes passed off as legit subjects. There's no such things "Dragon Ball Plus", "Shadow Shonen" or even a new "Super Mario Bros." film. But you're right, I was using the wrong tag. I should've marked them as hoaxes. Jonny2x4 18:43, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

That's a much more constructive way to resolve this. When I get a chance later tonight, I'll do some more digging and see if I can answer some of the concerns you have. In the meanwhile, you may want to ask for help from some of the people at WP:ANIME. If they can confirm this as a hoax, we can look towards getting these articles taken care of. Let me know if you have any further concerns. Cheers, Caknuck 23:06, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Ninja Gaiden 2

I noticed that you were the one that tagged Ninja Gaiden II: The Dark Sword of Chaos as having a plot summary that was too long. I've done some work to try to rectify the problem, but I'm not sure I reduced it enough. Do you think the issues in the tag have been addressed? Larrythefunkyferret 07:56, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

While I'm at it, I just noticed that you tagged Ninja Gaiden (NES) for having the same problem. Has that one been fixed? Larrythefunkyferret 08:01, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

I still think they could use some further editing. IF you want to know how to write a good plot summary, simply take a look at Devil May Cry, Metal Gear Solid or other GA-class and FA-class video articles. They get to the meat of the plot without having to divulge every plot twist that occurs in the story. Jonny2x4 15:38, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

I also suggest having a complete characters section for each game instead of simply listing the bosses in the game. Jonny2x4 15:43, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll start thinking of ways to reduce them. In my defence, I never touched the characters section; The thought of trying to fix up stuff like that tends to frighten me. Larrythefunkyferret 05:45, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Ashtar (Ninja Gaiden)

Your changing that into a redirect was brutal and unacceptable. The article on him you directed to doesn't even have a picture. I must disagree with this, he's the prime villain of the game. Rank is more important than appearance, and he outranks Jacquio. Tyciol 13:13, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Whatever. Role and status alone in the story does not warrant a stand-alone article. Find enough real-world out-of-universe references if you want justify a stand-alone article. Otherwise, its just in-universe fancruft. Jonny2x4 14:18, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Merge discussion for Dragon Ball: Curse of the Blood Rubies

An article that you have been involved in editing, Dragon Ball: Curse of the Blood Rubies, has been proposed to be merged into another article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going to the article, clicking on the (Discuss) link at the top of the article, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. --Pixelface (talk) 14:27, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Contra: Hard Corps

So, according to your analogy, as long as the characters in the game are totally different, the game is a spin-off? Don't act like you know it all. I use that superior tone for a reason. I definitely know a LOT more about Contra than you do and I know how to look into things. It is not a spin-off because it is an official Contra game and it follows the storyline of the Contra games. Next, and most importantly, Konami confirms that it is canon. So, before you talk, learn your stuff. See, it is actually more pathetic that someone without an account has to correct the one with an account. Learn the meaning of spin-off.

Also, another thing that shows your ignorance: the game DOES have aliens. Plus, it ties in with the previous titles in that an alien cell from the alien wars was recovered. Bet you didn't care about that, either, huh.

Wow. Another self-righteous no account troll. You might want to take a look at Wikipedia:Civility before editing. I don't mind being corrected, but I DO MIND being treated with disrespect (especially when it comes with such a trivial matter like this). First of all, you're correct. The game is canon, but Nobuya Nakazato describes this game as a "gaiden", which means side-story. Just because its a spinoff doesn't mean its not canon. Whereas Contra Spirits is a direct continuation of Contra and Super Contra with Bill and Lance fighting against the alien invaders from previous games. Contra: The Hard Corps, not only centered around a different cast of characters, the aliens were actually clones created by Bahamut and Dr. Mandrake. Jonny2x4 (talk) 21:15, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Learn the meaning of spin-off before bringing this whole thing into a formal-like manner. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.12.219.152 (talk) 21:27, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Spinoff = a product based on previous product. I'm pretty sure I know what the word mean. Anyway, don't act so formal yourself when you're the one who started with the superior tone and arrogance. Next time, you will be reported Jonny2x4 (talk) 21:44, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

That's the whole def? Or is that a segment of the def that you want to use in order to falsely make me look stupid? Report me, mutha fucka. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.53.146.96 (talk) 22:07, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Whatever. The word spinoff doesn't mean "non-canon" either way. As for making you "look stupid", well why would I want to do that? You're already doing a good job at that yourself. Happy Holidays! Jonny2x4 (talk) 22:36, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Contra 4

First of all, don't point Wikipedia rules at me if you're not going to use them yourself. I should remind you that you're not allowed to edit the same article multiple times a day.

Second, I call them as I see them, the sentence was removed with no explanation by a user doing multiple edits on the same day, this is usually a sign of Fanboyism. If you can't properly explain your actions, then take the consequences without whining.

Duhman0009 (talk) 16:34, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

I've already explained my actions to you, even though I don't really owe you one. Secondly, the only reason I can see that you're even taking that tone with me is because you're the one who originally added sentence in the first place (as evident by your contributions history) and you were under the impression that I deleted your contribution out of spite. Its really nothing you should've taken personally, but you did and you lashed on me by calling me a fanboy. Have a nice day! Jonny2x4 (talk) 16:49, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

You didn't explain it in the "Edit summary (Briefly describe the changes you have made):" section, which is where you should have done so. And yes, duh, I'm to one who added the original content in the first place, doesn't take Sherlock Holmes to figure that out, so you can stop praising yourself :P

So because of you lack of doing multiple edits and NOT explaining yourself in the PROPER area, you're to blame. Also, if you're not a fanboy, why so many edits on the same page? Only 4 types of people do that many editings on a page on the same day: Fanboys, Page Creators, Trolls, People in an Edit War. Thank you and have a nice day. Duhman0009 (talk) 17:02, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

I don't pretend I'm the perfect wikipedia editor, but its obvious you're angry at me for deleting your contribution, first by calling me a "fanboy" and then saying I'm "to blame" (of what, since technically speaking I did nothing wrong) and now you're trying to associate me with trolls and people involve with edit wars as well. Yes, I do forget to use the edit summaries most of the time, but I still don't think it justifies petty name calling. The reason why I did some extensive editing to the Contra 4 article on a single day is because I found the original state of the article itself to be rather lacking. One section was copied and pasted from a press release and the lead paragraph was just a plot summary explaining the chronological place in the series' in-universe timeline, instead of the actual development of the game and inspiration for the title. I think I've improved the article quite a bit, even if it still needs a few editing, but you don't even acknowledge that or give actual criticism of my other contributions. You're only focusing on that one sentence I accidentally deleted presumably because of "fanboyism" and blowing it out of proportion. Whatever happened to assuming good faith? Jonny2x4 (talk) 17:20, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

There's your problem right, you're NOT suppose to do multiple editing in a single day unless you're the page creator and if you're going to do so, at lease give out explanations. Also, true I really do not care about the rest because I do not care about the game. I was about to purchase it when I noticed that it didn't really any any special DS feature, so I added this in case someone decides to buy it but is wondering about the same thing as I did. As for assuming good faith, not something I practice on Wiki. Duhman0009 (talk) 17:35, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Well I'm hoping you at least understood my position and I'll correct myself next time when it comes to edit summaries (even I know I should use them more often). A few of my friends actually rejoiced when they heard Contra 4 doesn't use the touch screen, so I think the article really needs mentioning that. I personally think not buying Contra 4 because it doesn't support the DS' hardware features is a bit foolish. Its a really great game since its basically what the NES Contra games would've been on the SNES (Contra III was more of a giant boss rush mode for me) and I don't think a game like this in this age would've been made for another platform except the PSP, so the lack of DS-specific features isn't a factor to me. It might be a flaw to you, but its a virtue to me. Jonny2x4 (talk) 17:48, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough mate, take care. Duhman0009 (talk) 19:17, 26 December 2007 (UTC)