Jump to content

Talk:Fabula Nova Crystallis Final Fantasy

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Featured articleFabula Nova Crystallis Final Fantasy is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Featured topic starFabula Nova Crystallis Final Fantasy is the main article in the Fabula Nova Crystallis Final Fantasy series, a featured topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on April 21, 2023.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
May 12, 2014Good article nomineeListed
October 14, 2014Peer reviewReviewed
July 24, 2015Featured article candidatePromoted
July 25, 2021Featured topic candidatePromoted
Current status: Featured article
[edit]

What exactly is acceptable policy on one link leading to a listing of external fansites?--WhiteMateria 22:37, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Latin

[edit]

I made a little edit here the other day and I think someone got a little confused and said that "Fabula Nova Crystallum" would be "the new tale of the crystal". I just changed "crystallus" to "crytallum" as the Latin for "crystal" because the word is neuter; but the genetive form remains the same, so "fabula nova crystalli" is the correct Latin for "the new tale of the crystal".--Corbmobile

I agree completely. There is no way to get 'the new take of the crystal' from Fabula nova crystallis, without changing the form of crystallis, -i f. (also, crystallum, -i n.) to the -is, -is declension. I think it might be a problem with the translation from the Japanese original into Latin, taking the word for tale and the word for crystal and putting the next to each other like German does, but I can only guess. In the end though, the latin here must mean 'the new tale is a crystal' or 'the tale is a new crytal' if we want to keep things in the singular--Latin will kill you with one letter, as a certain Latinist will say. --Another Latin Lover —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.3.5.21 (talk) 02:50, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think that the correct Latin translation should be mkentioned in the article. Ninquelótë (talk) 00:13, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to necro this thread, but it might be worth noting here that I just pointed out the mistaken nature of the title in the article. Fabula Nova Crystallis would mean something like 'The Tale New in Crystals', but Fabula Nova Crystalli exactly means 'The New Tale of the Crystal', which is what the source cited says it is supposed to mean.
Of course, I'm assuming that Fabula Nova Crystallis actually is the name under which this series is marketed? ☿ Apaugasma (talk ☉) 02:16, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Apaugasma: I understand the point, but it could be phrased better in-article. I'd have stated that it's Square Enix providing the translation (tried looking for a third-party comment on any translation inaccuracies, but couldn't). I think it did at one point, but got lost in edits. And yes, Fabula Nova Crystallis is the name used whenever it's mentioned. --ProtoDrake (talk) 09:38, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, smart move attributing explicitly to Square Enix and interpreting Crystallis as a dative ('for the Crystals', this is perhaps more likely the origin of the mistake and in any case sounds much less awkward than an ablative 'New in Crystals').
I do think, however, that it would be better to have one footnote about the name (maybe mention the Japanese name after clearing up the Latin gaff, in one footnote?).
Also consider that now the main text, even though it is elaborating on the use of Latin terms such as Agito and Versus in the series, is not pointing out that Fabula Nova Crystallis is improper Latin. Maybe this needs a little rewriting to make it fit in without taking too much attention? It think it would be helpful to at least mention that it is incorrect. ☿ Apaugasma (talk ☉) 22:22, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Apaugasma: Glad you approve the change, I just checked in a couple of Latin-to-English translators and that's the result that came up. As to the rest, I gave the Latin stuff it's own note for two reasons. First, stuffing it all into one note made it extremely unwieldy. Second, the main prose in the "Common elements" section now also clarifies it's SQEX translating it, with the note also there (Note D after Citation 5 in the section's paragraph on Latin). I'm extremely wary of putting in "incorrecly"s and ultimately unsourced bracketed statements into the prose itself. A footnote is less unwieldy and easier on readability as far as I've experienced, and serves its purpose without overstressing the point. --ProtoDrake (talk) 22:33, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, it's a pity none of the sources appear to have noted the mistake. Agree about the need to not overstress. It really is incorrect, and mentioning that in the main text would avoid some confusion (especially for people who have studied a bit of Latin, perhaps long ago), but ultimately it's a very minor point. Thanks for responding to my feedback, ☿ Apaugasma (talk ☉) 22:49, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Haeresis

[edit]

Has this: A title called Final Fantasy Haeresis XIII, for example, was filed for trademark status on May 1, 2006.[3] been taken off because it is considered speculation?

Well, Haeresis isn't speculation but there's really nothing that can be said about it pertaining to the compilation other than the fact that its been filed as a trademark...--Claude 01:15, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The following comment in the article is uncited: "A 'logo' for Haeresis, done by Yoshitaka Amano, the image illustrator and title logo designer for Fabula Nova Crystallis, has now been published, although no additional artwork pertaining to the title has been officially released as of yet."

Can anyone show any evidence of this? I haven't heard anything about it personally. Dfsghjkgfhdg (talk) 17:09, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think I remember seeing it once, but it was just the words "Final Fantasy Haeresis XIII". There wasn't any Amano artwork on it or anything similar.—Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ (talk • contribs) 20:56, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I caught my eyes on the same sentence as well. Because there really isn't any logo that can be verified as official (only this, which looks like something anybody can make using Photoshop: http://www.forever-fantasy.net/modules.php?op=modload&name=4nAlbum&file=index&do=showpic&pid=907&orderby=dateD), and no sources to back it up after all these months, I'm going to remove the sentence as untrue. SamSandy (talk) 16:48, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I actually got to see the one with the logo, but it was a thumbnail from amano. i believe they aren't going to start on it until after versus. Also, final fantasy haeresis is confirmed to be part of fabula nova crystallis project. We should add it into the article.Haseo445 (talk) 15:59, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

I've added my fansite to the external links section.

Please note, before editing, that my site is non-profit and contains genuine and valid media/information with regards to the fabula nova crystallis project.

Joey

I understand where you're coming from but even though your site is non-profit, the content on it can easily be on hundreds of other sites (even if they copied it directly from yours). If you'd like, it would be more helpful to edit the article and add information there, rather than simply adding your link, for the time being. Axem Titanium 15:50, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki's policy states one external fansite link can be used. I've complied with this.

If you have any information from a good source, with regards to any character names in any of the fabula-nova-crystallis project, do post them here !

The fansite that was in the links is now "unavailable" according to the graphic on its front page, therefore there is now a slot for a replacement entry. Suggestions? SynergyBlades 18:22, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think it may be bad form to "invite" more fansites. They will come, whether we like it or not. Axem Titanium 21:54, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Should we add some good ones before a stereotype wannabe comes?--GHenrik 21:54, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The 3 dedicated best ones are FinalFantasy-XIII.net, FF-XIII.net and FinalFantasy13.org. All of them?--GHenrik 22:00, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template

[edit]

Has anybody else noticed that the Final Fantasy XIII games aren't on the template anymore? I'm sure I'm not alone when I say that it's somewhat irritating to have to type in the game name to go to the page. Or what's even worse is when I just click on the furthest for Final Fantasy XIII and it takes me to Final Fantasy XII —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.120.57.145 (talk • contribs) There is consensus not to include unreleased games on navigation templates. Go to WP:CVG and talk to them if you disagree. Axem Titanium 04:19, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well that's stupid, it just wastes peoples time to have to type out everything. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.174.128.249 (talk • contribs)
Well, then don't complain here. Axem Titanium 03:09, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dissidia

[edit]

Please do not add Dissidia to the article. A trademarked was filed for the sole name of "Dissidia", the logo of which contained no similarity to the usual Final Fantasy font. A group of hopeful sites decided it was "Final Fantasy Dissidia XIII", and soon it was reported as fact. Fortunately, reliable sites did not take hold of it, and a representative of Square Enix stated it had nothing to do with the Final Fantasy XIII series. --Teggles 07:02, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can we have some reliable sources for that? Verifiability, not truth. — Bluerです。 なにか? 08:00, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I couldn't find the page with the SE representative denying it, but this is the trademark in question. As you will see, NO reference to Final Fantasy is made. Pure speculation. --Teggles 09:46, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, the link does not work. Most of us would believe you, but your claims are still arguable. — Bluerです。 なにか? 13:39, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Square Enix has never confirmed officially that Dissidia was related to FFXIII. For that reason, Dissidia did not have to be added to the article, although Square had not denied it. Square Enix trademarked Dissidia, not Final Fantasy Dissidia XIII. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 83.45.57.13 (talk) 16:47, 29 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]
Go here, click "Trademarks", then click "Search Trademarks". On this new page, click "New User Form Search (Basic)". Now search for "Dissidia". --Teggles 19:27, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I see now. Thank you :). — Bluerです。 なにか? 12:22, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Why was this even disputed? The FACT was that it had nothing to do with FFXIII. As obvious by the trademark, FF has nothing to do with it. You can't take Dissidia, slap more words onto it, then pretend like it's "still arguable" when there was no proof to begin with--Claude 00:51, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Relax, you. It's already done with. Maintain your good faith. Some people need to keep their tempers low, really. Bluerです 03:36, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Melody?

[edit]

This link (http://n4g.com/events_tgs2007/News-67904.aspx) has voiced a rumour of (yet) another FF game for the [i]Cystallis[/i] series. The only 'proof' that this game exists is represented by this image (http://www.freep.cn/p.aspx?u=v20__p_0709151113229960_0.jpg). This rumour will only be confirmed at TGS, possibly. --81.157.137.161 16:19, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

its fake...that was fan made from one of the artworks or yoshitaka amano, also i dont think melody is a latin word —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.249.176.77 (talk) 17:29, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Fabula logo.jpg

[edit]

Image:Fabula logo.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 05:11, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Out of date?

[edit]

Some things mentioned in here need to be updated to reflect the individual articles on each game. In particular this page mentions that FFXIII will be a turn-based RPG which is clearly not true. --Vylen (talk) 15:16, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Square Enix diagram showing six titles

[edit]

On finalfantasy-xiii.net they show a diagram called "Unannounced Titles" that was shown at a Square Enix board meeting. The diagram lists six titles/circles in the Fabula Nova Crystallis Final Fantasy XIII series. Three circles are for the three announced titles. The only thing we know about the 3 unannounced titles is the size of their circles, which I believe shows the scope/grandeur of those projects. Maybe the bigger title/circle is Final Fantasy Haeresis XIII. I wonder if this is the mmorpg Rapture project that is being worked on by the Final Fantasy XI team. I don't want too much speculation on the main article, but I think it should be shown that Square Enix has partially and unofficially declared six titles with this diagram. What should we update on the article? :-) Dragonblades (talk) 01:45, 27 May 2008 (UTC)—Preceding unsigned comment added by Dragonblades (talk • contribs) 18:43, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing, because it's neither official nor are there any reliable sources. SynergyBlades (talk) 00:53, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yoshi Wada has already stated that this project could go as far as being active for a whole decade, so this already implies there will be more titles than the ones already announced. Their number is unknown though; the diagram was just an example used for explanation of the concept. Kariteh (talk) 07:44, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! I thought this image showed that three unannounced titles in the Fabula Nova Crystallis series were being developed, and that the image showed their relative importances. Are you sure that those three bubbles are just illustrating the concept and not showing that Square Enix in the board meeting was saying, "Yea there are three more unannounced titles in development, of these importances, but we'll announce them later"? I'm pretty excited, but where did this image come from in the first place, who put it online and when did this board meeting take place? Dragonblades (talk) 11:15, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Flagship title

[edit]

Most people have come to believe that the regular XIII will be the flagship title of FNC. However, some people are arguing a Japanese statement released by Square Enix. People say that it says black-and-white that Versus XIII will be the flagship title. If anyone can translate this it would be greatly appreciated. I used google translate but it didn't really clarify it too well.[1]23:22, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

The article mentions that Final Fantasy Versus XIII will act as a counter-point to Final Fantasy XIII in forming the core of the "FABULA NOVA CRYSTALLIS FINAL FANTASY XIII" series. I'm sure that's meant to be taken as they are both the 'core' components for "FABULA NOVA CRYSTALLIS". More than likely it'll be Versus XII will be the past and XIII is the present time period. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.127.41.85 (talk) 09:01, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Orience

[edit]

It would seem that three games all take place in the same world, but at different moments of time as mentioned in a interview relating the the games. Fractyl (talk) 00:58, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Haeresis?

[edit]

i know for sure haeresis was confirmed, but why isnt it on the article? if they discontinued it or delayed the production then we should say it, instead of keeping quiet.

If they didn't, then i suggest we add it at least in the development section or whatever you call it —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.249.176.77 (talk) 17:31, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's copyright has been comfirmed. However, they have not yet revealed if they will make it. But seeing as though the copyright is taken and Square Enix are working on about five new Final Fantasy games I'd say Haeresis is one of them.121.91.28.115 (talk) 10:05, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

B-class?

[edit]

This article needs improving. With all the work done on it, it should be up above C-class: but it's been around for years and it hasn't moved up beyond C-class. I think the mythology and setting sections are something that need attention, but how can that be done? To all editors; what needs to happen? --ProtoDrake (talk) 16:26, 12 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well the Reception section is lacking. If you look at Phantasy Star Online, you can see a table for rankings, you can probably copy that table and add it here for the FNC games. The mythology could be cleaned up a bit. Thats all i can say for now. I just skimmed through it.Lucia Black (talk) 22:04, 13 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Compiiling locations of different games may not be a good idea. Instead its best to have a "Common elements" section or "Common features". What these game share in common. Collecting the locations seems too much and considering each one has its own universe, that section will be more unnecessary and long.Lucia Black (talk) 22:10, 13 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've done some work on it. The reception section not has a ranking table in it (though admittedly at this point in time it looks a little bare), and I have changed the "Setting" section to just take in the common elements. I have also changed the mythology part of it and blended it with the common elements, so that it better reflects the story told across all the released games rather than just the Lightning Saga. Before you question the names, I will show you my logic: In the XIII mythos, Mwynn is the creator goddess banished to the Unseen World, while in Type-0, Diva seems to hold the same position as the vanished creator of Orience. Bhunivelze and (most certainly) Etro are mentioned in all of the games. As for Arecia and the Judge being the same as Pulse and Lindze; Pulse and Arecia want to use gentle, natural means of finding the doorway to the afterlife, while Lindze and the Judge seem more bent on a mass sacrifice of humans to force it open. So it seems logical that they are essentially the same deity in different forms across the games, which would fit in with what the project is. I've also put in a reference for the Type-0 "fal'Cie" and made the stuff about them and the l'Cie as concise and outside-neutral as I could. I know it probably still needs work, but what do you think? --ProtoDrake (talk) 23:34, 13 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I dont think the names should be bolded, and i dont know if its original research so you should probably source the name changes of Type-0. And if you do find sources, it probably best to have its own paragraph of the changes Type-0 added.Lucia Black (talk) 23:52, 13 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Also, I usually try to find a featured article model to work off of. In this case, Mana (series) is a featured and smallish sized series article, which would be a good template for this one. I'd reformat the headings to be like mana to start with, and make sure that all of that in universe history has as much developer and writer commentary as you can find. That's what I would do. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 03:15, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I've deleted the stuff about Type-0. You're right, it was speculation on my part. I guess until it releases in English, most things about the mythos and story of Type-0 are speculation. Also, de-bolded the names, corrected some grammar mistakes and shifted the Creation and Development section to be in a similar position with other articles of this kind. Really, this needs some more outside views, and for the two other games to be released, otherwise this is going nowhere fast. Also, I did try to find references for the in-universe stuff about fal'Cie, l'Cie and so on, but the only one I could find was an extra ref for the mythos and that one for the Type-0 fal'Cie. So, sorry, either it has to be deleted or it needs one of those messages putting on it until a time comes when it can be referenced. I think I've done all I can for the present. --ProtoDrake (talk) 08:12, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
What i think is missing in both "Creation and development" and/or "Titles" section is how Type-0 and Versus XIII were announced together originally when Fabula Nova Crystallis was announced. Another issue is not mentioning the significant changes such as initially known as Agito XIII and originally being developed for cell phones. It seems to focus too much on the XIII and sequels area. Or rather puts them at a priority. Also the excessive mention of where and when the developers staed/confirm something. As long as we say "Kitase stated" or "Toriyama had confirmed" the when and where seems unnecessary as long as the statements dont contradict eachother. I'll see if i can help out.Lucia Black (talk) 09:04, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I also see very questionable sources such as Squarehaven.com and FinalFantasyXIII.net I strongly suggest finding the original source, or changing the ref to have the original source (if these sites share the original sources).Lucia Black (talk) 09:47, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I had a look for the originals, without success. Either the original sources are paper rather than online or those pages have simply been taken down. But I really can't focus on this right now. Real life calls. Sorry if I seem to be abandoning ship, but I really need to do this. Good luck all. --ProtoDrake (talk) 10:48, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Its print media. The one on ff13.net cites Level magazine May 2007. Squarehaven seems to cite a playstation magazine.Lucia Black (talk) 22:35, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Right, I've done some major work on the development section, put in the stuff about the creation of the mythos, the announcement of the games, the known nitty-gritty about XIII and Agito XIII that was. Also added a few more references. Looking a lot better, I think. But I would certainly value a second opinion. --ProtoDrake (talk) 18:25, 11 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

For me, the thing separating the article from B status is sales and reviews of the games. Get that addressed and you have a B article. For GA, which is absolutely where this article should go next, I would suggest a gameplay image, concept art, or both. Also, common elements should include some common gameplay, character and musical elements if there are any. That would make it fly through GA. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 20:09, 11 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I've been thinking, and there aren't any common elements I can think of in the gameplay, and this series could easily have titles in the next-gen console range. The only other common theme I can find is an unreferenced (at the moment) story theme: challenging predestined fate. In the XIII games, it's about the characters challenging the predetermined end of the world or at least their assigned part in it, while in Type-0, it's about Class Zero altering the cycle of war and destruction that has plagued Orience since its creation. I don't know about Versus, but from the sound it it will have a similar story theme (given that it's linked to the same mythos). --ProtoDrake (talk) 09:22, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, common gameplay wont work here even if they are similar. The games are all being directed by different people. Maybe "lightning saga" can, but theres no direct sequels to the rest. On another note, it seems references to lightning saga were removed? Images dont really help with GA status all that much however maybe some refining could be done. This seems like it "barely" passes for B-class.Lucia Black (talk) 09:34, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The references to "Lightning saga" were never there in the first place. I've put them in now. And as to the theme I mentioned above, I found a place to put it and references to back it up. It could still do with some tweaking, but really we need Versus, Lightning Returns and an English Type-0 before we can fill in all the gaps. --ProtoDrake (talk) 09:50, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
As long as this article includes everything we know, shouldn't it pass GA? Isn't it "comprehensive" as of this moment? Judgesurreal777 (talk) 10:51, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Problem is, its not worth GAN if the article will change eventually. There are so many gaps still left to be filled and most of it cant be filled yet. When i said references to lightning saga i was referring to mentions, the article uses "XIII series" to intentionally dodge lightning saga. The wording in gameplay could be expanded. Its far too broken and short.Lucia Black (talk) 11:42, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Then it seems this article has ground to a halt. Circumstances beyond our control now prevent its further productive growth as far as I can see. We will just have to wait and content ourselves with the thing as it stands, adding info if new stuff comes and maybe, as Lucia suggested, improving the gameplay section, but apart from that.. Well, I've reached my original goal of getting the thing up to B-class, and it's not as if it's the only article on Wikipedia that's in this state. --ProtoDrake (talk) 11:56, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I respectfully disagree. I believe, from what I can tell from policy, is that comprehensiveness is derived from what is available from reliable sources, and these articles include everything there is. Articles like Type O, Versus and this one are comprehensive right now. They include all known information, and are of a good size. They should be able to become Good articles as a result, and just like a topic grows as more games are created and then added to it, as more games are released we can add that information. In reference to Type-O, there is no indication it will come to the west, it has been several years as well. Also, versus could be cancelled, so the only guaranteed release in this game series upcoming is Lightning Returns, and that will just entail adding a few sentences to each paragraph. I really think we could make a GA run, but I won't argue if you disagree. :) Judgesurreal777 (talk) 14:00, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
In respectful response to a few of those points: The Type-0 article is by no means comprehensive: quite a few points of info are outdated, the phrasing needs heavy work and the plot summery is only what I was able to pick up in pieces across a number of sources, and there is currently no way of bringing in said references (unless there is someone fluent in Japanese around our space who is willing). And by the way, it has not been "years", it has been a year and a half and it's not the only game that has taken a while getting to our shores (think of Final Fantasy II and III: they took fourteen and thirteen years respectively). As to Versus, Nomura has confirmed that it will be revealed, and it is likely to be revealed shortly. It has not been cancelled, and even if it's been given another name, it could still be part of the FNC series. It would only be if it were removed from the series entirely that we would need to leave it out of our calculations. Lightning Returns can hardly be considered at the moment, that's at least three months away from release. So I feel we should wait and see. Who knows, this year's E3 could see Versus given a release date and the TGS could see an English Type-0 announced. --ProtoDrake (talk) 14:17, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Well I really hope we get Type-O, it looks great, and I would like to see what Versus looks like after all this time. So the plan is....perhaps we could get Lightning and Lightning returns to B status? Or are we done with FFXIII for the moment? Judgesurreal777 (talk) 15:42, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
That goes without saying. I've done two whole article revamps concerned with XIII, and I'm afraid I'm either board or sick with doing large-scale editing work for now. It's harder than it looks. As to the article about Lightning, it does not need so much work. The reception and development sections look pretty comprehensive: just some grammar tweaks, a check that the references are up to par, possibly a few extra quotes and other things for her story sections and it can be safely upgraded. Maybe use Cloud Strife and Tidus as blueprints for reference. But that is for Lightning's talk page. Wouldn't want us talking behind her back, would she? --ProtoDrake (talk) 16:27, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Fabula Nova Crystallis Final Fantasy/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Tezero (talk · contribs) 00:34, 12 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Good Article review progress box
Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()
3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()
Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

Claiming this one. I'll start looking at it right away. Tezero (talk) 00:34, 12 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • The series title translates as "The New Tale of the Crystal" - In... Latin? If so, which variety, if applicable?
  • A screenshot'd be helpful to show the overall style of the sub-series, perhaps the overall gameplay style coupled with some recurring element.
  • "A spinoff from the" - It's more than one game. I'd rephrase this.
  • "that it could extend over a decade" - From 2007 or from when the sub-series started?
  • "The game received an award nomination" - What'd it lose to? I know little about the main-series Final Fantasys post-PS1.
  • The word "sell" and its derivatives are used an awful lot in the last paragraph of Reception. You can elect how, but I'd prefer some rewording for flow.
  • There's an awful lot of Andriasang and Siliconera, which as I recall are only situationally acceptable as RSes. I'll trust you here, but be wary of how they're being used if you decide to FAC this.

Putting this on hold; I don't expect my complaints to take long to fix. Tezero (talk) 00:51, 12 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Just going to say that a screenshot of the common elements is very difficult to do. The problem is, each game was made by different directors, and none of them consulted each other when creating it. So whatever similar elements each has is purely coincidental. the only thing that they do have in common intentionally is the mythology that they share and even then each one interpreted it differently. As of now, the only thing they have in common in gameplay is that they are more action oriented games, but its not universally common with each game. Lucia Black (talk) 07:43, 12 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've fixed most of the issues I think (and the blurb doesn't say what variety of Latin is used). I agree with Lucia Black about the screenshot, and as to Siliconera and Andriasang, the reason they are being used is because the info in them wasn't really anywhere else in that much detail and in English. --ProtoDrake (talk) 16:01, 12 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, it looks pretty solid. I'll pass this. Tezero (talk) 16:26, 12 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

FFXV not connected to mythology

[edit]

http://na.square-enix.com/us/blog/final-fantasy-xv-interview-environment-artist-hiromitsu-sasaki-0

Down the bottom: "Final Fantasy XV is no longer connected to the Fabula Nova Crystallis mythology (this was announced at PAX Prime last year)"

Brayden96 (talk) 17:32, 24 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

OK, let's kick FFXV out of this. Ezio's Assassin (talk) 13:13, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 63 external links on Fabula Nova Crystallis Final Fantasy. 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:

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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 01:24, 29 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Fabula Nova Crystallis Final Fantasy. 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:

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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 12:15, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Fabula Nova Crystallis Final Fantasy. 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:

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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 09:53, 27 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Fabula Nova Crystallis Final Fantasy. 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:

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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 06:35, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Fabula Nova Crystallis Final Fantasy. 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:

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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 16:20, 11 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Fabula_Nova_Crystallis_Final_Fantasy&oldid=1205915822"