| Latest revision |
Your text |
| Line 27: |
Line 27: |
|
| |
|
| ==Comments and Suggestions== | | ==Comments and Suggestions== |
| *"semi-recurring" doesn't make sense.
| |
| *The third and fourth lines in the lead are waffling.
| |
| *The Learning lines for CoM and ReCoM are needlessly long.
| |
| *The Casting for BBS mentions Salvation, which is irrelevant.
| |
| *The bit about the Holy-G is completely irrelevant to this page, and redundant to the actual Gummi's page.
| |
| *The Angel Star bit is needless, and since it says "holy" rather than "Holy", speculative.
| |
| *The Kingdom Hearts II section is much, much too long. All it need say is that Minnie and Mickey can cast it, and possibly describe how it works.
| |
| *"Enemies who use" has always been a terrible section, and absolutely should not be on the final page.
| |
| *The "Quotes" section is pointless filler.
| |
| *The second trivia point is missing words, or placed wrong.
| |
| *The third trivia point is completely irrelevant to KH, and even if it was, it should be in the etymology.
| |
|
| |
|
| |
| In general, the format we have now (1) describes what the attack does in the lead, (2) describes how to get it, and (3) describes what the name means. That's all the ''actual'' information about a technique there is - as shown here, anything else you try to throw in ends up being waffling, filler, or otherwise completely irrelevant.[[User:KrytenKoro|<small>Glorious</small>]] [[User_talk:KrytenKoro|<small>CHAOS!</small>]] 03:31, September 29, 2010 (UTC)
| |
| {{Chris|text=I accept your criticisms, though I disagree with several.
| |
|
| |
| Semi-recurring means that appears in some games, but not in others.
| |
|
| |
| Salvation is relevant, since it does the same thing, just as abilities that use the same attribute as the Fire, Blizzard, Thunder, and Aero spells are relevant on those pages.
| |
|
| |
| The Angel Star also appears to use light-based magic, making it relevant.
| |
|
| |
| I disagree about the enemies who use it being irrelevant. Some enemies have a certain elemental theme, for example, such as Roxas with Light, Jaffar Genie with Fire, and so forth.
| |
|
| |
| The second trivia point is missing a word, though it was a mistake I believed I had corrected.
| |
|
| |
| What a technique does and how to obtain it are the basic points of information about it.
| |
|
| |
| You are also, quite frankly, tactless. What is more, you say to tell what the name means, but criticise me for providing its origin? Please, do be more consistent. Individual usages of a word within certain media do not constitute an etymology. The etymology of the word "holy" is its history as a part of the English language -- it is the direct descendant of the Middle English "hooly", which is, in turn, a descendant of Old English "halig", both of which sound very nearly like the word as it is now pronounced. You also know that I am perfectly aware of your opinion of my formatting this page, and so restating it here strikes me as a want of self-control and a tendency to think your opinion above that of anybody else. Please kindly remember that it is not, and that I do not appreciate being so addressed on my own talk page.}}
| |
|
| |
| "Recurring" is the correct term. It does not imply that it appears in every installment, just that it appears in more than one. --[[User:Neumannz|'''<span style="font-family:Gisha; color:#005400">Neumannz</span>''']], [[User talk:Neumannz|''<span style="color:black; font-family:Agency FB Bold">The Dark Falcon</span>'']] 18:03, September 29, 2010 (UTC)
| |
| :No, Salvation is not relevant. Salvation will get it's own page. It does not need to be covered here. That is a major misunderstanding of how the "see also" works.
| |
| :Re:Angel Star: "Appears" is the clincher there.
| |
| :Theme, yes. "Explicitly uses this spell", no, which is why I dislike it.
| |
| :"What a technique does and how to obtain it are the basic points of information about it." - they are also pretty much all there is to say about these abilities, since they have no influence on the plot, and are purely mechanical concepts. Most anything further is waffling.
| |
| :Yes, I am tactless. It helps get people to give up faster on changing my mind.
| |
| :Let me put it this way re:etymology - any explanation of the name's history beyond where it appeared in FF or Disney is completely useless to us. Your complaint, then, boils down to "the header name does not accurately describe the contents". How would you change the header to resolve this problem?
| |
| :EDIT: New critique - the first trivia point is, by its nature, useless. It is weasel-wording (one of some that generally aren't), preventing it from being either informative or worth being the trivia section.
| |
| :You are the one who created a section for "comments and suggestions". I am trying to dissuade any work that will end up being wasted, since it is no good for either of us - you use up all your time writing something that will be left unused, and become bitter, and I have to revert the edit, wasting my time. I am sorry about this, but it is true - by and large, what you've done here will be of no use to the wiki, and criticizing me as a person is not going to change that. You can either address the criticisms of your work, or continue to spend time railing against me, but that's your decision.[[User:KrytenKoro|<small>Glorious</small>]] [[User_talk:KrytenKoro|<small>CHAOS!</small>]] 18:14, September 29, 2010 (UTC)
| |
|
| |
|
| |
| {{Chris|euh=Your readings of what is relevant and what is not ring highly shallow. Claiming that the name of a spell has no further relevance on the plot might be true for some, but untrue for others. For example, consider how Ventus, whose name means "wind" in Latin, has not only a wind-based theme, but also one based on divinity as well, for his deck commands include "Faith" and "Salvation". These reenforce his character as one of innocence and purity, and hint at his heart of pure light. So no, the basic points of a technique are not all there is to say about it, I fear. You did not, I hope, believe I would have included them without believing there to be reason to? And did, I hope, think about what that reason might be before dismissing it?
| |
|
| |
| In a well-executed game, abilities are often more than "mechanical concepts" as you call them, and the names given to them may sometimes be used to give a subtle bit of characterisation. For the issue of theme versus explicitly using the spell, Roxas uses the same (or nearly the same) laser graphic Ventus does, and also fires a stream of pearl-esque objects. As it has been shown between the games, an individual spell can take many forms, or even several within the same game (Cf. Days), and many enemy abilities are identical in attribute to the spells to which Sora has access without looking the same (and have the same effects, even, but with different graphics).
| |
|
| |
| I concede that Salvation does belong in ''See Also'' (something I had forgotten to include), and also, upon reflection, that ''recurring'' and not ''semi-recurring'' is the proper word.
| |
|
| |
| Please clarify your complaint about the first trivia point.
| |
|
| |
| As for criticising you as a person, I felt the need to do so because your comments seemed decidedly less-worthy of attention then they might otherwise have been owing to the way in which they were presented. Tactlessness is a fault, not a virtue -- that would be honesty.}}
| |
| :Your first paragraph there is largely speculation, and should not in any way be covered on the ability pages. If they would be appropriate for the character pages, that is one thing, but here, absolutely not.
| |
| :Yes, I did consider it. I also considered the fact that this is an article about something that has absolutely no relevance to the plot, has never even been mentioned by the directors, and is in there as a fun thing to do. Proportion is important as well.
| |
| :Roxas fires pillars of light. Ventus can fire pillars of divine light. Yes, there is a connection - it is mostly within the "pillars of light". Sora can fire them as well, as can Mickey.
| |
| :This is an article on an ability, not an attribute. For attributes, there are only six within the series anyway - fire, blizzard, thunder, dark, physical, nil. Days introduces some others purely as status effects, and these are covered on the status effect page. For all intents and purposes, Holy has as much in common with the Angel Star's attack as the Oblivion or Metal Chocobo's standard attacks do.
| |
| :The first trivia point is absolutely useless, as it uses weasel wording. Wikipedia explains exactly what is meant by that if you need more, but essentially, information is not worthwhile if it is wishy-washy. (See below)
| |
| :If you are unwilling to listen to my critiques because they are critical of your work, again, that is your decision. I did not criticize you, merely the material you put forth; I was trying to dissuade you from wasting your time. Continuing to attack me or attempt to embarrass my position does nothing to change my mind, and is not likely to change anyone else's - I am, and have always been, a near-soulless monster that cares naught for feelings, but only for what is right.[[User:KrytenKoro|<small>Glorious</small>]] [[User_talk:KrytenKoro|<small>CHAOS!</small>]] 23:05, September 29, 2010 (UTC)
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
| The first trivia point:
| |
|
| |
| :"Holy is one of several spells that appear recurringly in spinoff games that are not generally castable in main-sequence games. Other such spells include Quake, Warp, and Tornado."
| |
| #This is demonstrably false. According to Nomura, KHBbS is a main-sequence game. It also appears in KH2, where the player controls its casting as a Reaction Command and when playing as Mickey. However, it does not appear in coded or Mobile, so it has 2/3 main-sequence game appearances, while only 2/4 spinoff appearances.
| |
| #"not generally castable", based on its inherent lack of definition, means that it is basically against policy as a trivia point, and even if we didn't have that policy, it would still lack any usefulness as information.([http://tfwiki.net/wiki/User:Repowers])
| |
| #The "Other such spells" list is much too biased. Even if we were going for a very specific meaning of "Spells that can only be used, whenever desired, by the main character, in spinoff games", there are many more to add to that. Unfortunately, due to point 1 ("BbS is main-sequence"), none of the ones listed actually count.
| |
|
| |
| In general, the trivia section is something to avoid. Anything put there must be (1) ''absolutely'' inarguable, and (2) demonstrate significant relevance and import. It is not a place to put any possible connection that one can think of.[[User:KrytenKoro|<small>Glorious</small>]] [[User_talk:KrytenKoro|<small>CHAOS!</small>]] 23:05, September 29, 2010 (UTC)
| |
|
| |
| {{Chris|euh=Though I must own disliking your wording still, I concede the point to the evidence submitted.
| |
|
| |
| I have revised the page, and, after reflection, discovered that many of your criticisms were valid, though I do believe that the history of the word itself is still of interest (and is also a proveable fact). You may strike the first trivia point from the page. The wording "not generally castable" was removed prior to my reading that.
| |
|
| |
| The quotes section has also been removed. This was added under influence from another Wiki which deals with games that often have lengthily incantations, which Kingdom Hearts does not.
| |
|
| |
| The directors need not mention everything about a game for it to be relevant -- and I was arguing that the spell was relevant to characterisation rather than plot. It may be owing to my background in English (the academic subject, not the language), but, if analysed, certain details relating to characters and plot points can take on more relevance if the reasoning behind the use of certain words is understood.
| |
|
| |
| This wiki does seem to suffer from a misunderstanding of what an etymology is, however. If the origin of the word as a part of the language is not desired, then the heading should be changed to "origin". Stating that a spell called "holy" appears in a game related to the series is not an etymology, as it does not explain where the word itself came from, only this one particular use of it to name something within a specific context, and which does not conflict with its usual meaning.}}
| |
|
| |
| === Ummm... ===
| |
|
| |
| Very sorry to intrude, but Heartless can't use Holy magic. Just because one was born of such spells and they cast ''similar'' looking magic does '''not''' mean it is that magic. Oh, and for etymology, only the origin of the ''spell'' is included. Seriously dude, we all know the meaning of the word ''holy''. On this wiki, we don't put etymology for the meaning of words that are known by sentinent indiviuals. {{The Inexistentsig}}
| |
|
| |
| :And wait, I thought that the [[gravity]] article was the template article for magic. {{The Inexistentsig}}
| |
|
| |
| {{Chris|text=It is a suggested revision. Point about heartless taken. The section has been deleted from the specimen.
| |
|
| |
| The origin of the spell should be labelled "origin" then, and not "etymology".}}
| |
|
| |
| :No, but here is the thing: etymology is the immediate definition. That, as such, is a FF reference. ''That'' is the only thing we need. Therefore, the meaning and origin of the word is pointless here. <small>Oh, and we don't put the origin of the word on any other etymologies on the wiki...</small> {{The Inexistentsig}}
| |
|
| |
| {{Chris|degout=Then I must point out, again, that the usage of the word in the Final Fantasy series does not constitute an etymology, but rather the origin of the spell and its usage in this one specific context. If what you say is placed now under the heading of "etymology", the heading itself shall need to be changed to read "origin" on each page where it so appears.}}
| |
|
| |
| First, the trivia I wish to speak about. Then I will talk about the etymology again.
| |
|
| |
| *''Holy is one of several spells that appear recurringly in spinoff games that are not castable in main-sequence games. Other such spells include Quake, Warp, Raging Storm, Mega-Flare, and Tornado. <span style="color:red;">Rule of thumb is that it must be unique to be trivia. Besides, this speaks of non KH games.</span>
| |
|
| |
| *Although it often has an attribute of its own in Final Fantasy titles, Holy has no attribute in the Kingdom Hearts series. '' <span style="color:red;">It doesn't have an attribute because it was never actually a castable spell. In CoM it was a slight (not a spell). In BbS, it is a Deck Command (I'm not sure if other spells are deck commands or not).</span>
| |
|
| |
| Ah, on to etymology.
| |
|
| |
| ''Dictionary.com'' reads:
| |
| ''–noun, plural -gies.
| |
| # the derivation of a word.
| |
| # '''an account of the history of a particular word or element of a word.'''
| |
| # the study of historical linguistic change, esp. as manifested in individual words. ''
| |
|
| |
| Examples on the wiki that lead to the second definition:
| |
| *[[1001 Nights]]
| |
| *[[Megacosm]]
| |
|
| |
| In fact, I'm not going to list any more. If you look at any weapon article with etymology (magic ''is'' a weapon), you will find not the origin of the actual words, but the reference of their names.
| |
|
| |
| {{The Inexistentsig}}
| |
|
| |
| :Oh, and why is Roxas in the "See also"? {{The Inexistentsig}}
| |
|
| |
| ::[[User:The Inexistent/Magic|Here]] {{The Inexistentsig}}
| |