26,192
edits
Talk:Keyblade Armor: Difference between revisions
TSH, hiding broken file links.
(replaced: which → that (27), Armor of the Master → Armor of Eraqus (6)) |
(TSH, hiding broken file links.) |
||
| (32 intermediate revisions by 10 users not shown) | |||
| Line 67: | Line 67: | ||
<gallery> | <gallery> | ||
File:Xemnas (Armored Controller) KHII.png | File:Xemnas (Armored Controller) KHII.png | ||
File:Terra_armor.png | <!--File:Terra_armor.png--> | ||
</gallery> | </gallery> | ||
Let us start with comparing the heads. Both have the metal plumes coming off on both sides and are identical in almost every way except for color. The only difference is that Xemnas dons a crown. All the keyblade armors have unique shoulder armors, so does Xemnas's. Compare the design and structure of the chest it's quite similar. The key difference here is that Xemnas's is parted by a nobody insignia in the center. Both armors feature elongated arm guards from the lower arm. Xemnas's is quite a deal larger but most everything in his armors design is over the top to add a powerful feel to it. Now I'd like to direct your attention to the feet. Both have metal wings that sprout from them. Xemnas's armor has much smaller ones but they are clearly there. | Let us start with comparing the heads. Both have the metal plumes coming off on both sides and are identical in almost every way except for color. The only difference is that Xemnas dons a crown. All the keyblade armors have unique shoulder armors, so does Xemnas's. Compare the design and structure of the chest it's quite similar. The key difference here is that Xemnas's is parted by a nobody insignia in the center. Both armors feature elongated arm guards from the lower arm. Xemnas's is quite a deal larger but most everything in his armors design is over the top to add a powerful feel to it. Now I'd like to direct your attention to the feet. Both have metal wings that sprout from them. Xemnas's armor has much smaller ones but they are clearly there. | ||
| Line 456: | Line 456: | ||
:He actually does still have the robes, if you look at the screenshots from the No Heart battle. They just aren't in the official art. | :He actually does still have the robes, if you look at the screenshots from the No Heart battle. They just aren't in the official art. | ||
:The article says "Keyblade Armor is armor that is worn by Keyblade wielders". Which it is. That statement is factually true even if it COULD be worn by others, because ''so far it has only been worn by Keyblade wielders''.{{User:KrytenKoro/Sig}} 06:26, January 9, 2011 (UTC) | :The article says "Keyblade Armor is armor that is worn by Keyblade wielders". Which it is. That statement is factually true even if it COULD be worn by others, because ''so far it has only been worn by Keyblade wielders''.{{User:KrytenKoro/Sig}} 06:26, January 9, 2011 (UTC) | ||
== Pluralization == | |||
I can't find any sources on pluralization of "armor" beyond wiktionary, and nerds arguing on forums about what the pluralization should be (MW annoyingly lacks mentions of pluralization, as do the other online dictionaries I can access). As for "suits of Keyblade Armor", I believe this should be fine, as "suits of armor" is the way it's normally referred to in other texts, and a Keyblade Armor is very much a suit of armor.{{User:KrytenKoro/Sig}} 20:02, 20 January 2015 (UTC) | |||
:Agreed. I am positive that "armor" is the plural of "armor" anyway. {{User:TheFifteenthMember/Sig1}} 20:34, 20 January 2015 (UTC) | |||
::Those armor?{{User:KrytenKoro/Sig}} 20:38, 20 January 2015 (UTC) | |||
:::Eh? I believe that "armor" is a non-quantifiable noun, like water, which certainly makes it awkward with some pronouns or articles. Consider "those water" vs. "that water". It's the same situation. {{User:TheFifteenthMember/Sig1}} 20:44, 20 January 2015 (UTC) | |||
::"Waters" is definitely a word, for one, and wiktionary calls "armor" both countable and uncountable (it also explicitly says "armors" is a plural form of "armor", but oh well).{{User:KrytenKoro/Sig}} 23:01, 20 January 2015 (UTC) | |||
:::"Armors" is a word, apparently, just as "waters" is. But it just sounds plain awkward. Thus we say "suits of armor" because that is effectively what Keyblade Armor is. It's a generic term; "armors" is never used in-game. Even when addressing multiple characters, for example, Eraqus says "Your '''armor''' will protect you." - {{User:EternalNothingnessXIII/Sig}} 02:24, 21 January 2015 (UTC) | |||
Exactly. You would use "armors" to talk about groupings of armor, like you would use "waters" for bodies of water. Like, "Soldiers in the Middle Ages employed different armors in battle, including padded, scale, and chain mail." --{{User:Neumannz/SigTemplate}} 04:48, 21 January 2015 (UTC) | |||
== Xion == | |||
Although Xion's forms resemble armor, its not to say that she is physically wearing armor. From what appears it shows that is her "true" form. Another problem is that Keyblade armor has a purpose and it is to protect the one wearing it from the darkness. Xion's armor-like appearance is not confirmed. Even in quotations, makes things more suggestive and subjective, rather than clear and objective.[[User:Lucia Black 0013|Lucia Black 0013]] ([[User talk:Lucia Black 0013|talk]]) 05:34, 10 June 2015 (UTC) | |||
Not only that but the key fact that the armor is based on keyblades as well. There are several inaccuracies with it, suggesting the armor has more abilities. | |||
:Your objection is not relevant to how the article actually presents the Xion situation. You might be looking at a prior revision of the page. | |||
:Also, the idea that the armor is based on Keyblades is pure speculation. Nothing states that, and in fact, we see Xemnas in his Keyblade Armor without a Keyblade. All we know is that it is a suit of armor that ''Keyblade'' wielders wear, used to protect them from the darkness.{{User:KrytenKoro/Sig}} 15:45, 10 June 2015 (UTC) | |||
== Union Armor == | |||
Should this be in other appearances?{{User:KrytenKoro/Sig}} 16:00, 25 July 2016 (UTC) | |||
:If there's an in-universe way to mention members of the different unions obtaining individual sets of Keyblade Armor, then it should be mentioned in the Story section instead, no? {{User:Chitalian8/Sig}} 17:04, 25 July 2016 (UTC) | |||
::I put them there for two reasons: 1. They are just costumes, no real Keyblade armors. 2. They aren't acknowledged by the game at all and besides the avatars no other NPC player wears them. Maybe they will become important in future cutscenes but for now they are just fluff like every other costume. --{{User:ShardofTruth/Sig}} 20:48, 25 July 2016 (UTC) | |||
==Canon name?== | |||
I realize it may have been answered already but... Is "Keyblade Armor" a real canon name from the series? Because I absolutely do not recall where they use it in BBS so... If it is, can someone tell me where it is used please? [[User:Lady Junky|Lady Junky]] ([[User talk:Lady Junky|talk]]) 14:15, 20 February 2018 (UTC) | |||
:Kryten moved the page in 2010 citing Maggosh as the source of information but I can't seem to find the discussion. I also can only find "armor", both in English and Japanese, as a term. --{{User:ShardofTruth/Sig}} 18:19, 20 February 2018 (UTC) | |||
::Exactly. I also found the name "Armor" on multiple occasions... but "Keyblade Armor"? Nah :/ [[User:Lady Junky|Lady Junky]] ([[User talk:Lady Junky|talk]]) 22:00, 20 February 2018 (UTC) | |||
:::I know this is digging up an old can of worms, but if that's the case, should this be renamed back to "Armor"? When the article was created, there was a debate among the community back on the Keyhole about the article's name, and it kept switching back to "Armor" and "Keyblade Armor". I also haven't found anything in the BbS Ultimania that indicates that the official name is "Keyblade Armor", and it's simply referred to as "Armor". Kryten was the resident translator for the Japanese names, and was even the one we added the Japanese characters for the article. We could just in with him about the name, and see if he remembers where the name originated from.--{{User:NinjaSheik/Sig}} 22:13, 20 February 2018 (UTC) | |||
::::The BBS Bradygames guide calls it Keyblade Armor in the strategy section of the Terra-Xehanort fight. We're still looking for confirmation on the Japanese name. {{User:TheSilentHero/Sig}} 23:03, 20 February 2018 (UTC) | |||
:::::Yeah, I just checked too. Page 75 of the guide: "In the final battle, Xehanort takes Terra's body, leaving you to fight from within your Keyblade Armor." Not sure if it is used somewhere else in the guide... But, in any case, it should be added as source on the page, cos the canonicity of this name is far from being easy to find... IF we consider it canon? Cos the name is not from the games, and the guide is not made by SE directly so... [[User:Lady Junky|Lady Junky]] ([[User talk:Lady Junky|talk]]) 23:07, 20 February 2018 (UTC) | |||
::::::Agreed. Can anyone screenshot the image of that section. It'd be good to source the information with visible proof. If we don't agree that it is canon, then at the very least, it should be mentioned in the Trivia section.--{{User:NinjaSheik/Sig}} 23:32, 20 February 2018 (UTC) | |||
[https://imgur.com/a/IrH64 Here]. I made a screenshot of the whole page and a second one of the section where they use "Keyblade Armor" :) [[User:Lady Junky|Lady Junky]] ([[User talk:Lady Junky|talk]]) 23:40, 20 February 2018 (UTC) | |||
::::::::I don't see any reason to not treat it as canon. We use the Bradygames guides to determine the English names of otherwise-unnamed topics everywhere else (attack names, enemy names, enemy stats, etc.). As far as I have found, the games use "armor" (not "Armor"), indicating that we don't currently have an in-game canon name. We have a long precedent of accepting the Bradygames name in that instance.{{User:KrytenKoro/Sig}} 17:58, 21 February 2018 (UTC) | |||
:::::::::@Lady Junky: All right, thank you! :D I'll add the citation to the page, then.--{{User:NinjaSheik/Sig}} 20:49, 21 February 2018 (UTC) | |||
::::::::::Since we don't have a source for the Japanese name yet, I'm going to change it to just 鎧, as it is called in the Ultimania. {{User:TheSilentHero/Sig}} 18:21, 22 February 2018 (UTC) | |||
== Sources == | |||
If we're accurately citing to a published work, we don't need the image. We're using proper citing already. | |||
For the interviews, we need to cite to the ''interview'', not to khinsider. We can credit goldpanner or whoever for the translation, but khinsider is not the original source.{{User:KrytenKoro/Sig}} 18:35, 23 February 2018 (UTC) | |||
:We may not ''need'' the image, but I think it's a good idea to keep it nevertheless. Providing physical evidence of the page from the guide book—an image directly showing where we got our source from—further validates that fact for readers who do not own the guide book and/or simply do not want it, and to readers who believe we're "making stuff up". It's not my style to sweat the small stuff, so if you guys really want to remove it, then that's fine. The link to the image adds more credibility since it allows readers to click on the link and see the evidence for their own eyes, but if you guys are oppose to having it, I'll concede to what the community wants. It's nothing to make a fuss over. | |||
:As for the sources, I do try to cite the original interviews, though it's hard considering that I have don't which page or issue which interview is from. All I am doing is quoting from the translators and sourcing them at the end of the reference. By no means is the citation claiming that KHInsider is the original source since I literally put "Translation via Goldpanner/Lissar" at the very end (I was following the examples we already had on the KHWiki when I began doing this), because as per our policies and their policies, we have to credit them if we're using their translations as a source. KHInsider have their resident translations, though they sometimes don't credit who specifically done the translations in their published posts or in the forums.--{{User:NinjaSheik/Sig}} 21:25, 23 February 2018 (UTC) | |||
::Then the image can be put on the talk page. It sets a bad precedent to require scans when things are already accurately cited.{{User:KrytenKoro/Sig}} 16:51, 1 March 2018 (UTC) | |||
:::I don't see how it's bad. I've always been taught the more valid sources you have, the better it is, because people will always have the "see it to believe it" mindset. I thought providing physical evidence of the actual scan of the page was a good thing, because it only ever works in one's favor. But if you're that against it, then you can remove it.--{{User:NinjaSheik/Sig}} 22:03, 1 March 2018 (UTC) | |||
::::I don't see why people would think we're making stuff up when we are directly quoting the book and even mention the exact page it can be found on. If people need to "see it to believe it", then they should get the book themselves. And like Kryten said, we can put the link on the talk page, so people can still see it. {{User:TheSilentHero/Sig}} 22:28, 1 March 2018 (UTC) | |||
:::::Well, both the wikias and Wikipedia are always considered dubious sites to retrieve information from, and teachers often lecture students even "sources" can be ultimately false. It's something that's always been drilled into students, so I always like to have as many credible sources as possible. I still don't see the harm in keeping the link to the image, but very well. It's nothing to make a huge deal over.--{{User:NinjaSheik/Sig}} 22:44, 1 March 2018 (UTC) | |||