Talk:Kingdom Hearts HD 1.5 ReMIX

From the Kingdom Hearts Wiki, the Kingdom Hearts encyclopedia
Revision as of 13:17, 20 September 2012 by Neumannz (talk | contribs) (→‎Name Change)
Jump to navigationJump to search

NAME CONFUSION

Karkat%27s-Sprite.gif
Neumannz — 30px-Cancer_Symbol.png EVERYBODY OUT OF THE GODDAMN WAY. I GOT A LAB FULL OF HUMANS, A MOUTH FULL OF YELLING, AND A TORTURED PSYCHOLOGICAL PROFILE FULL OF TOTALLY HYSTERICAL EMOTIONS AND UNAIRED GRIEVANCES AT PRACTICALLY EVERYBODY.
TALK — 02:00, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
 
NZ: Is it 1.5 or I.5?
NZ: The logo font appears to show an "I"
NZ: But the text on the official page uses a "1".
It's 1.5. The 1 just looks like an "I" to emphasize that it's an HD remake of the first Kingdom Hearts. Official website information, and press information all refer to it as "1.5", not "I.5". --Tektek (talk) 04:03, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Name Change

Just gotta say this, but the article's title is wrong. It should be the way it's written (and pronounced!): "Kingdom Hearts HD 1.5 ReMIX". --68.230.252.5 03:52, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Do this thing."We're werewolves, not swearwolves." (KrytenKoro) 04:23, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
I can't. T_T Doesn't look like I can move it. But YOU the admin should be able to! --Tektek (talk) 04:32, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
The official website and all press coverage refer to it as Kingdom Hearts 1.5 HD ReMIX, not Kingdom Hearts HD 1.5 ReMIX. The logo looks the way it does to appear balanced. --Knehcs (talk) 09:06, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
You're probably right, I've shouldn't have moved the page so fast, but is it with the hyphens/dashs or without? --ShardofTruth (talk) 09:47, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Can we get some links? The official page doesn't just have "HD 1.5" in the logo; scroll down the page... --Neumannz, The Dark Falcon 13:17, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

One last little thing

File:15icon.png

3 I have absolutely no idea how to implement these on the pages, but here's a top icon. --Tektek (talk) 04:27, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Stop changing the freaking logo people =_=

Until an official transparent logo is out in the wild, stick with the one I uploaded. It's higher resolution than the one from the official website. Not to mention, it has a white background - compared to the site's that has a black. It causes a huge contrast with the ALL THE OTHER PAGES, and just generally looks like crap. Don't be difficult and senselessly stubborn. Just because it's from the official website doesn't make it the go-to-image, especially when there's a considerably better alternative. --Tektek (talk) 05:06, 20 September 2012 (UTC)