Jump to content

Talk:Kingdom Hearts/Archive 6

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1←Archive 4Archive 5Archive 6

Main Page

First off, Holy Crap that is awesome! Second, I don't think this really needs to be said but we'll of course need to keep an eye on the article for vandalism and other non-constructive edits from now until it comes off the main page. And third, Holy Crap that is awesome! Great job getting here everyone. (Guyinblack25 talk 18:38, 30 September 2007 (UTC))

Congratulations on the selection. To many more main pages in the future. — Blue。 18:54, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
I just want to remind you all that if there is vandalism on this page when it is featured here on the main page, please revert it as soon as posible and put warnings on the vandals' talk pages. Any comments or objections? Greg Jones II 19:47, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
That and we probably don't need a reminder, but remember the WP:3RR. Of course it doesn't apply to vandalism, but there may be some people trying to edit the article with an honest intention that may inadvertently do more harm than good. No sense getting blocked when it looks like we'll have a good number of people watching over the article. Just leave a polite but to the point comment in the edit summary to discourage it. Also, are the some templates available for us to easily/quickly leave on talk pages for vandalism and other non-constructive edits? (Guyinblack25 talk 21:35, 30 September 2007 (UTC))

And expect people to complain that this article is a fluff piece designed to advertise a game that has been released over a year ago. 128.227.61.49 05:50, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

It appears to be protected [1] so I guess there won't be much vandalism to worry about! Ripberger 00:19, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Sweet, load off my mind. Thanks for the heads up. (Guyinblack25 talk 00:22, 4 October 2007 (UTC))
Uh, its only move protection. IPs and new users can still edit the page, they just can't move it. 128.227.127.75 00:54, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
And a load back on my mind. :-p Thanks for the head ups. (Guyinblack25 talk 00:56, 4 October 2007 (UTC))


If there are vandals, be sure not to revert more than three times to avoid WP:3RR. Greg Jones II 01:00, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Eh, sorry about the protection thing. I didn't look closely at the edit summary of the protecting administrator. If its blatant vandalism, you can go over 3RR [2]. Ripberger 01:41, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Congrats, chaps! --Jim Raynor 06:23, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Spoilers

I put a spoiler tag on the Story section, but someone removed it. That section reveals the entire plot of the games.

66.68.102.164 02:06, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Spoilers have been removed on most of the articles on Wikipedia for a couple reasons.
  1. Wikipedia is not censored
  2. The section titles "plot" and "story" imply that information about the plot and story will be listed.
This has been a trend on Wikipedia for a while now and is starting to be enforced as a loose guideline. That's why your edit was reverted. Hope there are no hard feelings, just trying to follow the rules. (Guyinblack25 talk 02:11, 4 October 2007 (UTC))
"reveals the entire plot of the games"? As amazing as it may seem, that is the point of the section. ' 02:45, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

It's not really helpful to anyone. - BlackSlivers 03:27, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Article status is not determined by helpfulness or popularity but by quality, verifiability, and reliability. If you have a problem with it, you should take it up with the Featured Content administrator. (Guyinblack25 talk 03:34, 4 October 2007 (UTC))
It's a featured article, because video game fans (and apparently, especially Sqaure fans) are passionate enough about what they like to make their articles the best. If you want to see more "helpful" articles hit the main page, go work on those to bring them up to par. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ 10:57, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Kind of a pity that Square Enix no longer seems to feel the same way about their own work, huh? 71.56.155.117 23:33, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

I have a (minor) complaint about this being a featured article. In the past 6 months or so there have been 3 featured articles about video games from Square. While the content may be very good, surely this is over the top? I have Wikipedia as my home page so that I learn about new things every day - seeing (yet another) article about a Square video game just made me sigh. AidanRogers 11:14, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Take it up with the featured content administrator. I'm not sure what people hope to accomplish by telling us this. Gee, it's as if other editors are unhappy with what we're doing and want us to stop. If you don't want it on the main page take it up with the FC admin. "Today's featured article" is picked well in advance and they can be found with a little searching. If you don't like what is going to be on the main page, express your views on the proper FC page (not the article talk page) before it goes up. This talk page is to talk about how to improve the article. Not to vent frustration with Wikipedia's actions and policies. (Guyinblack25 talk 13:02, 4 October 2007 (UTC))
Appreciate you letting me know where I should take this up. Given that I'm not a regular contributor to Wikipedia, I was hoping to find out this sort of information - this seemed like a good place to start. Having said that, your somewhat unfriendly attitude does put me off trying. AidanRogers 13:13, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
With all due respect, your unfriendly comment about seeing the article that several editors have work on to get to FA on the main page makes me feel the same way. But that's not going to stop me from trying to improve more articles about things I'm interested in and I see no reason why my comment should stop you from expressing your views to the appropriate person. I hope you do and I apologize if my comments have put you off. The link you may be looking for is Wikipedia:Today's featured article (Guyinblack25 talk 13:31, 4 October 2007 (UTC))

How come the Kingdom Hearts feature on the Main Page has no picture or other image, unlike nearly every other article that has been featured there? Is is because of copyright ot trademark concerns? Surely there are some images of the game that fall under GNU that can be used? Even if only the KH logo? Oh, and you now TWO tags telling people that this page is not a forum for fannish discussion. I think one is more than enough. The page has enough tags as it is, it's starting to look cluttered. -Wilfredo Martinez 14:02, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

I believe this is the rationale for it. (Guyinblack25 talk 14:09, 4 October 2007 (UTC))
So... in effect, it's OK to show trademarked images in wikipedia articles, but not on the front page- not even ones provided by the companies themselves for publicity? Isn't that like saying that stealing is OK as long as you don't get caught? No, I'm not complaining, after all, copyright protection is the one rule I feel has to be followed in Wikipedia (since it's a real law; I take the rest only as guidelines- at least until the day unregistered people who don't even bother to read the rules are no longer allowed to edit articles) but it does seem strange. -Wilfredo Martinez 00:05, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
Not quite. Basically, it WOULD be legal to show a pic on the front page. Fair use laws allow it. But WP is, in general, more strict than said law. The basic rule is that "ONLY article space allows fair use". The main page isn't article space, so it's not allowed there. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ 00:16, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
Well, technically the Main Page is in the article namespace because it doesn't have any prefix. :) Axem Titanium 00:55, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
So, as I expected, it's just the result of more obsession over the fine points of rules (which are often contradicted by other rules). As I said, I don't really mind. But I hope some day Wikipedia is ruled by common sense and not rules-lawyers. -Wilfredo Martinez 16:01, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
Well, consider that the main page is the most visible page on the site -- therefore, it SHOULD be help to the highest standard of what is considered the way to do things on WP. I for one think it's unappealing to not have a pic, but I can see the reasoning for it. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ 16:09, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
I'm not gonna spend time getting caught in a reversion war with anyone, but I do stand by my statement in the Edit Summary(which for some reason, was cut off at the comma), that it's more accurate to say the series includes most of Disney's "regular" voice actors, as the "original" VA's are all long dead. But like I said, I'm not gonna agonize over it.DiScOrD tHe LuNaTiC 15:20, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Ok, when you put it that way it makes more sense. It looks like we're trying to convey the same information, but your wording is better. Thanks for bringing this to the talk page, very few people do. Sorry your edit summary got cut off and sorry for the misunderstanding. (Guyinblack25 talk 15:25, 4 October 2007 (UTC))
All featured articles always seem to be based on how many references or citations there are. I've seen loads of better written pages here, that have a B-rating because of lack of references and stuff. This, I think, defeats the entire purpose of Wikipedia. But hey, that's just me. --Kaizer13 18:41, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Well, Kaizer, see, here's the thing: refs are important because they show the information came from somewhere reliable, that the information is correct and factual. It doesn't matter if a page is written well, if it has no refs, any bit of information in it can be contested at any time. That's why refs and citations are an important factor in deciding Featured articles and such. Do you understand? Well, this is getting rather forumy, so let's please wrap this up.HadesDragon 18:50, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Suggestion

I suggest that the Kingdom Hearts (series) page have an Animanga box. It has enough stuff to. Is there anyone who opposes this idea, and if so, why? Kikiluvscheese 16:32, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Well, what is an Animanga box, exactly?HadesDragon 16:40, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
I believe they're talking about the anime and manga infobox used by the Anime and manga project. See here for details. I'm actually opposed to it some. It sounds like a good idea, but I don't think it's really needed.
  1. The majority of the relevant information that would be found in the infobox is already located in the manga section of the List of Kingdom Hearts media. And with several redirects for the KH manga, people should find the info with ease.
  2. Even though the manga are based on the video game series, they are still broken up into separate manga series. I don't think an infobox on the series article would be the best place for a infobox of three related short manga series. Maybe on the separate game articles, though.
This does bring up an interesting idea though. Maybe the cvg infobox should be tweaked to include manga spin offs. (Guyinblack25 talk 21:37, 7 October 2007 (UTC))

Switch sections

Something that I thought I'd run by everyone. On the Final Fantasy article, the "Reception" and the "Merchandise" sections were switched to help the flow of the article. What does everyone think about doing the same here? (Guyinblack25 talk 17:48, 10 October 2007 (UTC))

You mean, the Reception section would be at the bottom, instead of Merchandise? Sure, I'm all for it.HadesDragon 21:56, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

KeyBlade Wars

Has anyone thought of Kingdom Hearts: KeyBlade Wars ? It's also rumored to be an upcomming game in the Kingdom Hearts series. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.233.67.140 (talk) 02:49, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

The whole "rumor" thing is the problem.—Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ (talk • contribs) 03:02, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
Exactly. You see, Wikipedia isn't a place to report things like that. We're sticking with what's confirmed.User talk:HadesDragon).HadesDragon 22:09, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

There is no keyblade wars, the game you speak of is kingdom hearts : birth by sleep sorry —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.215.211.73 (talk) 05:21, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Xbox 360

I heard that there may be a new Kingdom Hearts coming to the 360. Is it true, and should we add it the page? 72.75.250.160 (talk) 23:26, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Currently there are only three titles that have been announced for the Nintendo DS, Sony PSP, and mobile phones. While the director has expressed interest in continuing the story beyond these new titles, nothing has been confirmed or announced from Square Enix or Disney. Sorry, but it is probably either a rumor or wishful thinking at this point. (Guyinblack25 talk 23:32, 26 November 2007 (UTC))

Since This Seems Like the General Area

While I don't approve of the merging of the articles, I've noticed that both the universe article and the characters articles both have sections on the areas. Someone should destroy one of those.--Mullon (talk) 23:45, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

What are you referring to? The character page is divided into sections by world. Axem Titanium (talk) 00:46, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

I think that kingdom of hearts is the best!FYI wikipedia is awesome just like kingdom hearts — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.213.187.206 (talk) 18:32, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

Reception section

Just thought I'd throw out a suggestion and see what everyone thought about it. What about adding in table of aggregate scores similar to Crazy Taxi (series)#Reception? Any thoughts? (Guyinblack25 talk 23:29, 8 January 2008 (UTC))

I was bold and added it in. If it looks a bit off or doesn't seem appropriate, we can remove it. (Guyinblack25 talk 18:58, 10 January 2008 (UTC))

Is sora from a final fantasy? Oh, I didn't know. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.213.187.206 (talk) 18:34, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

Kingdom Hearts Ultimania

That's a great site for Kingdom Hearts.. don't you think that should be added to the External links? --Neilmodi (talk • contribs) 20:33, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

I guess so.SLJCOAAATR 1 (talk) 20:59, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, but fansites get really divisive and it's usually best to just leave them all off and stick to official links. Axem Titanium (talk) 05:00, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
As Axem stated, fan sites are not suitable external links per WP:VG/EL. Sorry, it is a good site, but it is not well suited for an encyclopedic article. (Guyinblack25 talk 18:06, 23 January 2008 (UTC))

"Kingdom Hearts 3"

That secret ending movie on the second game, people say it's the third, however, as far as I've been able to confirm, it's not. It's something different, yet the same. "10 years before Kingdom Hearts" I've heard... I thought about trying to find more (and better) information here, but it's not included in this article. Any help? --DameGreyWulf (talk) 03:09, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

You are correct, a KH3 has not been announced. The trailer is for Kingdom Hearts Birth by Sleep. (Guyinblack25 talk 03:42, 26 January 2008 (UTC))
Thank you! --DameGreyWulf (talk) 04:56, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

New info about Birth by Sleep and 358/2 Days

Some French magazines apparently published new information about these two games. Not sure if there's anything useful but here are the links: Scans - Translations FightingStreet (talk) 15:42, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

The information is useful, but unfortunately without the proper citation there isn't much we can do with it. :-( That's kind of one of the down side to Wikipedia, we need proper citations to properly verify content. If you find anything else, please let us know. (Guyinblack25 talk 16:41, 18 March 2008 (UTC))

Hi, Following a rule change, Kingdom Hearts now fails featured topic criteria 1.d. and 3.c., as Kingdom Hearts 358/2 Days, Kingdom Hearts Birth by Sleep and Kingdom Hearts coded need to be audited for quality and added to the topic. The topic has 6 months from the time of the rule change, or until 2009-01-03, to re-meet the criterion - rst20xx (talk) 01:09, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Secret paragraph

Could the secret paragraph in the promotion section be displayed? It is currently hidden by <-- --> tags, for some reason. Weirdo with a Beardo (talk) 14:30, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

It was hidden because the information became outdated. It was saved because it was believed to be useful for development sections at a later time. Some of it has been included into Kingdom Hearts Birth by Sleep, Kingdom Hearts 358/2 Days, and Kingdom Hearts coded. Don't worry it hasn't been forgotten, and will be used once more information about the new games is revealed. (Guyinblack25 talk 14:47, 18 July 2008 (UTC))
I understand, thanks. Weirdo with a Beardo (talk) 15:10, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

This Featured Article has a total of three dead external links, which can be found here. Please fix them as soon as possible. Thanks! --haha169 (talk) 00:45, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Links look good, except the Play-Asia link which timesout. — Dispenser 00:46, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Rename to just Kingdom Hearts

Just throwing this out there... With the three new games coming out, the series has gained some more notoriety. I'd say the series itself, rather than the first game, is generally referred to more when people mention "Kingdom Hearts". What does everyone think about renaming this article from "Kingdom Hearts (series)" to just "Kingdom Hearts", and the first game article from "Kingdom Hearts" to "Kingdom Hearts (video game)"? Any thoughts? (Guyinblack25 talk 14:38, 10 August 2008 (UTC))

I assume this follows the Final Fantasy approach. Are the arguments for that approach applicable for Kingdom Hearts as well? — Blue。 14:49, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
I believe they are, but will go with consensus. If others disagree, then there's no need to move it. (Guyinblack25 talk 15:01, 10 August 2008 (UTC))
I think it's a splendid idea. On the Norwegian Wikipedia (where I'm quite active) the same idea has been used. See for example no:Kingdom Hearts and no:Kingdom Hearts (videospill). I believe the Spanish and French wikis do the same thing. The Prince (talk) 18:17, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
We have a Kingdom Hearts article already. Is there any reason Kingdom Hearts can't refer to the series (merge)? And get rid of the Featured Article. Featured Articles tend to be impossible to edit, because someone believes any small edit is a form of vandalism. I wanted to add an interpretation section for KH (somewhere near the story) due to the symbolic imagery really lends to interpretation (and it's helpful for my film critic class to be able to analyze film/games). Instead, it was taken down. I'm not sure whether KH meets the featured article standards, but I'm sure not both Kingdom Hearts and Kingdom Hearts(series) are. So it would be nice if one of these was loosened to just normal article status. Bulmabriefs144 (talk) 15:44, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
That's completely irrelevant to what we're discussing here. Commenting on whether the article should be featured or not should be brought to WP:FAR instead. The Prince (talk) 10:27, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
Prince is right. And in regard to you edits, they were removed because they were not supported by reliable sources and are you're own interpretations which constitute original research. I'm sorry, but Wikipedia is not intended for such content. (Guyinblack25 talk 16:10, 7 September 2008 (UTC))

So, is everyone in favour of the move? The Prince (talk) 19:26, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Support, based on the reasonings, I am for the move. — Blue。 19:47, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
Three of us is probably enough for a rough consensus, but I'd say we put this on hold until after the Version 0.7. Many editors—myself included—are focusing more on cleaning up articles rather than talk page issues.
Blue- If you have the time, you may want to look at some of the FF articles you worked on. Several have been selected for inclusion in Version 0.7. Check out the VG 0.7 workshop for details.
Prince- I think you already got yours. Much appreciated. However, if you feel the need to do some more, you'd be even more appreciated. :-D (Guyinblack25 talk 20:11, 30 September 2008 (UTC))

Having read through the above comments, I haven't formed a serious opinion one way or another (really have no objection to either form), but I'm wondering, are there any guidelines from WP:VG on this? If not, would it be worth mentioning on their talk, as well as the SquareEnix wiki project, for further input? (I just wonder if three voices really *should* be enough for a rough consensus, no offense meant.) Also, since the series article will be moved over the game article (or presumably the redirect left after the game article is moved first), just want to remind people to make sure the history moves are properly done so as to maintain things under the GFDL. umrguy42 22:13, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Just my two cents from an inactive editor, since the vast majority of people who have any idea what KH is and may possibly want to find out some information, they don't know about the new unreleased games yet. In that light, to them, there are only 3 games. Thus, I suggest waiting until said new games come out to perform the move. Otherwise, I'm completely in support of the proposal. Axem Titanium (talk) 14:42, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Re: Chain Of Memories

Hey someone who knows how to do refrences go to gamespot and refrence re chain. every time i write about Re;chain's being released in the us this year they erase it. It's official, even on Square-Enix.com, so quit erasing it, someone help. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lunar Eclipz (talk • contribs) 08:32, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

I believe it's already in there. Check the last sentence of the second paragraph under the main games section. Thanks for the heads up. (Guyinblack25 talk 14:35, 8 October 2008 (UTC))

it's been released, so someone can erase this topic now. thanks. Ivyluv (talk) 06:27, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

kh mobile

shal we treat it just as a new game, or something? --SquallLeonhart_ITA (talk) 20:30, 12 October 2008 (UTC) Yeah, what's up with this one? Information on it is impossible to find. Of course, we're not talking about the 3D Vcast game. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.130.4.224 (talk) 08:09, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

It has its own article, Kingdom Hearts coded. (Guyinblack25 talk 15:23, 25 November 2008 (UTC))

it's not about kh coded and the vcast episode, but it's about a new kind of game titled kingdom hearts mobile in japan --SquallLeonhart_ITA (talk) 20:37, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Kingdom Hearts X???

On ign.com(probably not a reliable resource, though...), there is a page called Kingdom Hearts X. It's claimed to be the actual 3rd installment in the Kingdom Hearts series(what i mean is a main game in the series). can someone confirm this, or is it just bull? Ivyluv (talk) 02:34, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

It says it's a rumored title on the page. Nomura has stated plans to release future titles in the series, so the page is probably a reference to that. (Guyinblack25 talk 04:11, 6 December 2008 (UTC))

huh. makes sense. thanks for answering so quickly. Ivyluv (talk) 06:26, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

KH3 (again, I guess)

While browsing on Youtube I've seen a video showing the cover of Kingdom Hearts III: Keyblade Wars for PS3 and although I know that game has only been confirmed as a rumor up to now, I just wanted to be sure. The video's title is "Kingdom Hearts 3 - The Keyblade Wars (PS3)" if anyone wants to check it out. —Preceding unsigned comment added by One-eyed Nero (talk • contribs) 20:30, 28 December 2008 (UTC)


its fake, its a rumor, a fan made title. the secret ending to kh2 is actualy showing kh birth by sleep....this is really old —Preceding unsigned comment added by Haseo445 (talk • contribs) 17:16, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Vandalism?

The page seems to have been vandalized? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.107.216.90 (talk) 19:17, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Alas, that happens. If you can, feel free to revert the vandalism yourself... if not, it'll likely be caught shortly after. Thanks for the report, however. umrguy42 23:35, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

When is the game coming out?

My friend Shane is wandering when is it coming out in stores. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.58.196.26 (talk) 19:48, 4 April 2009 (UTC) I don't understand the point of vandalism, I used to do it myself but now I don't understand why. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.213.187.206 (talk) 18:38, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

Kingdom Hearts III

Nomura has mentioned a Kingdom Hearts III in quite a few interviews now. Just this last one on www.kh2.co.uk has Nomura mention that Birth by Sleep has the most volume of the series and has presentiment of KH3. Isn't that worthy of a mention in the main article? Jienum (talk) 11:15, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Though I haven't kept up with all the recent info, I'd say no. Mainly because the info I do remember was very ambiguous, and I worry that well-meaning fans will run wild with the content. Kinda like how we held off adding Xion to Organization XIII until more concrete info was released. (Guyinblack25 talk 14:15, 27 May 2009 (UTC))
Yeah, maybe you're right. I tell you, those April Fool jokers did a really convincing job with that fake Kingdom Hearts III logo. But Nomura did mention that once these three games are over, it will be Sora's turn again. Jienum (talk) 19:50, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
[3] - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 20:55, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
I believe that is only a rumor. See Joystiq article. (Guyinblack25 talk 23:24, 2 June 2009 (UTC))

358/2 Days

Shouldn't Kingdom Hearts: 358/2 Days be included in the Main games section now? I mean, it's been released in Japan and everyone knows the gameplay and the story. Coded hasn't been completely released, I agree, but I don't think 358/2 Days should be part of the Future of the series section, because it's a present title now. Jienum (talk) 15:47, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Quite right, the article is in need of updating. I plan on making some large revisions to the whole topic in the near future, which should address the point you brought up and others. Of course, I won't stand in anybody's way who wants to update it themselves. (Guyinblack25 talk 19:13, 23 June 2009 (UTC))

The game Coded has already released, the third chapter is already out. SO it should already be posted here. It's one of those games that gets updated by month/week. I dont see how it should stay in future section.Bread Ninja (talk) 16:02, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

I just added it. Jienum (talk) 12:18, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Chainsawblade?

Nomura interview (via 1up). I dunno if it's something we should include, but it's definitely good for a laugh. :) Axem Titanium (talk) 05:06, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Kingdom Hearts Products

We all know how there is the Playarts Action Figures and the stuff from the Square Enix Store, as well as the clothes from Hot Topic, but I can see no mention of them anywhere, I remember there once being a section on the figures, but it's gone, so what happened to it (out of curiosity)?--Lightlowemon (talk) 11:56, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

If you have a reliable source or maybe a press release about the clothing we can add them in. I think a company even made some shoes in the visual style of Sora's final form, but we couldn't find the proper sourcing.
The content about the figures is in Kingdom Hearts (series)#Other media, it was just moved further up in the article. (Guyinblack25 talk 14:56, 1 September 2009 (UTC))
I see, well does the online retailer count ([4]) and for the shoes I can't even get to the airwalk site with its flash coding?--Lightlowemon (talk) 15:49, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
I think online retails are tricky sources to use because their content can change (i.e. the items can disappear from the site). After looking at the clothing, I think the current content ("Merchandise ranged from toys and figurines to clothing items and jewelry.") adequately covers things. Unless we have a source or some press release that explains why Hot Topic's KH clothes are notably different from the other KH clothing merchandise. (Guyinblack25 talk 16:09, 1 September 2009 (UTC))
Okay then, I see your reasoning, Thanks for answering. --Lightlowemon (talk) 01:45, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Main Games

Shouldn't coded and 358/2 Days be under a different category instead of Main Games? Because they aren't main main games, they're just sidestories (not that they aren't equally important). (Lalo22 20:18, 18 October 2009 (EST))

I believe that "Main" is being used to indicate "things that aren't V CAST", which I admit, is not the best term for it. (I thought of substituting "console", but I'm sure people would say "PSP and DS [etc] aren't consoles!") Possibly we could come up with a better division? Maybe Console/Handheld/Phone? umrguy42 15:03, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
The first paragraph for "Games" should be significantly trimmed down and "Main games" heading should be removed. The "V CAST" section should probably be renamed to "Mobile phone games" and describe the V CAST and KH coded. The "Future of the series" section should probably be removed as well, since only one game has yet to be released and it's release date is approaching. My two cents. (Guyinblack25 talk 15:23, 19 October 2009 (UTC))
I'm sure that Nomura had stated before that no actual Kingdom Hearts games(which means it excludes V-Cast) are side-stories. That means that CoM, 358/2, coded and Birth by Sleep should all be considered main games(sequels), even though they are technically spin-offs. Though in my opinion they can be classified into console and handhelds. I think we should leave the future of the series thing there since a "new" game will be teased at the end of BBS.KiasuKiasiMan (talk) 05:27, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Message from the KINGDOM

Should we add it to the external links list? Message from the KINGDOM is the Official Kingdom Hearts Blog which is updated by Kingdom Hearts team members as well as Nomura himself on Kingdom Hearts news as well as development on future products. Link: http://blog.jp.square-enix.com/kingdom/ I feel that since it is official and contains exclusive news about Kingdom Hearts we should add it to the list of external references. KiasuKiasiMan (talk) 15:18, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Renaming to Kingdom Hearts Again

Well the three "future games" are almost all released and we know that there would be at least another game to the series. So I think it may be time to reconsider renaming this article to Kingdom Hearts and the current Kingdom Hearts to Kingdom Hearts (video game). Since the series is slowly expanding and is soon to consist of six games. So lets see whether we can establish a consensus as to whether or not to move. KiasuKiasiMan (talk) 03:27, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Not that I want to spread the discussion, but I started a discussion here at WT:VG to bring in more eyes, and see if we can get some guidance on just what the naming conventions actually say. umrguy42 04:34, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
The general consensus at WT:VG, as well as the WP:VG naming conventions, is indeed as KiasuKiasiMan says. Five sequels, the manga, and the soundtrack releases seem to qualify. If there is consensus, though, I think we need an administrator to help with the move, which should go Kingdom Hearts -> Kingdom Hearts (video game), admin deletes resulting redirect, then Kingdom Hearts (series) -> Kingdom Hearts, and add a hatnote to it pointing to the KH (VG) page. umrguy42 16:13, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
Hmm it doesn't seem like there are really enough people to care about it to form a consensus. But since there isn't any opposition to the idea, should we just go ahead and move it? I'll place a request for it and see if it goes smoothly.KiasuKiasiMan (talk) 16:14, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Moved per discussion. The argumnents for the move were much more convincing then the arguments against. While a dab page could have been created, I think that the current situation works for now. While there may be multiple video games, that issue can be addressed when we have multiple articles and after the links are cleaned up from this move. I'll leave it to the reguar editors here to sort out the incoming links. Vegaswikian (talk) 08:33, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Kingdom Hearts → Kingdom Hearts (video game) — Since the launch of the first game Kingdom Hearts has developed into a wide series consisting of numerous games, novels as well as mangas. Thus Kingdom Hearts is now more commonly referred to as a series rather than as simply the first game. The move is also supported by the disambiguation section of the naming conventions for the series. Hence the first game should be moved to Kingdom Hearts (video game) and the series page should be moved to Kingdom Hearts. An example of how this has been done before is that Final Fantasy directs to the series page while the first game, Final Fantasy is under Final Fantasy (video game) --KiasuKiasiMan (talk) 16:28, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Striking previous (procedural) oppose. No opinion on move. umrguy42 15:28, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
The V cast game does not have an article so I would think most people typing in Kingdom Hearts (video game) would be looking for the PlayStation game. Also a hatlink could be added to that article to the section on this page for te V cast game.--70.24.177.230 (talk) 23:02, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
Agreed. Even if one is made, the idea of keeping the article there because there are two games that use the title is silly. The logic that "there are two video games called KH" just proves that a disambig is more than necessary. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 07:43, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Kingdom Hearts (series) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RFC bot 17:00, 7 November 2009 (UTC)


Chronology

the kingdom hearts series chronology is wrong. 358/2 days is actually before chain of memories.Bread Ninja (talk) 16:02, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

I believe 358/2 Days takes place before and after Chain of Memories. Regardless, that chronology template may get deleted. (Guyinblack25 talk 16:07, 10 December 2009 (UTC))
Is there any way to fix it?Bread Ninja (talk) 15:38, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
358/2 Days starts before chain of memories but takes place primarily after CoM. Anyway how do you edit those type of templates?KiasuKiasiMan (talk) 12:07, 12 December 2009 (UTC)


"Riku then turned himself into an Ansem-like look, and ruined the future for Zack and Cody." What the heck? This is vandalism right? 174.3.166.138 (talk) 00:44, 22 December 2009 (UTC) Sean 12.21.09

Vandalism

Help! This is vandalized and I can't undo it because it has blocked links in it. What do I do? Uber-Awesomeness (talk) 02:27, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Never mind... Uber-Awesomeness (talk) 02:43, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
PS: Look at the help desk. I have a question about signatures. (Lol, stupid mouseover cursor =D)

Was Tifa Lockhart's classic attire "too sexy" to appear in the first game?

I get the feeling that the reason why the game developers didn't put Tifa Lockhart in the first game was because her classic Final Fantasy VII attire (belly-baring tank top and short leather mini-skirt) may have been considered "too sexy" for younger game players. At that time, the film Final Fantasy VII: Advent Children had not entered production yet, and in the film, she's more covered up. They later put her in the second game, dressed in her Advent Children attire. Now she's in Dissidia 012 Final Fantasy, and is dressed in her classic Final Fantasy VII attire, but I still have to wonder: would she be considered "too sexy" if she was implemented in the first game while dressed in her classic attire? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.156.9.97 (talk) 19:49, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

This may be possible, but without a source talking about this, we can't include such speculation in the article. In fact, we'd need a source that specifically says Tifa was 'too sexy' to be included before it'd be worthwhile to include. umrguy42 20:51, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
Perhaps the Disney executives may have objected to having her in the game because of not only her outfit, but also perhaps because she has big boobs? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.156.7.98 (talk) 22:19, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
This is starting to look like a forum as she appears only in one game and this is just a doubt by a person with no sources.Tintor2 (talk) 00:15, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
Indeed, I was just trying to extend a little good faith to the IP and say what we'd need to be able to include this stuff, instead of just slapping a "not a forum" tag here. umrguy42 01:21, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
There is actually a "not a forum" tag here.Tintor2 (talk) 01:25, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Final Mixes?

Has there been any word on international releases of the Final Mix versions of Kingdom Hearts & II yet? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.172.124.72 (talk) 13:30, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Release dates

(Sorry, yes yes I'm not a member, blablabla. Oh and sorry for my english: I'm french and it's always hard to speak correctly.) In the release dates chronology, someone added the dates of the remakes and Final Mixes versions. I disagree with that: in this chronology should be the main episodes only. That's why I changed that. (If my message is not clear, please tell me ^^'...) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.179.146.196 (talk) 21:09, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

What Final Fantasy Game is Sora from?

That's pretty much my question. Any insight would be appreciated. Daganolson (talk) 00:24, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

He is from neither. He's a character original to Kingdom Heart jsut as many others are. It woul be best to look for information first before asking.Lucia Black (talk) 01:09, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Sora, Kairi, Riku, and Organization XIII are all original characters of the series. Blake (Talk·Edits) 03:19, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Lifetime Sales

It says on the official website of Square Enix that the lifetime sales of the franchise are 17 million units. In the article it says 14 million shipped. Can someone edit this? CLICK HERE FOR SOURCE — Preceding unsigned comment added by WWETrishMickiefan (talk • contribs) 13:16, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the source. I incorporated it into the article, but next time, I recommend that you be WP:BOLD and try it out for yourself. If you have any trouble, I'm sure someone will help you out. Axem Titanium (talk) 14:50, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Collections section

I thought I'd add this to see if any resolution can be made of this. A dynamic IP has been reverting edits that remove info moved to a "Collections" section for HD 1.5 ReMIX, and places it back for the respective games. This section was created by myself, because it should have it's own section to talk about that game, and presumable since HD 2.5 ReMIX will be coming, it can be added there as well. This IP seems to have no reason for reverting, but if they feel that it should go back to the previous version, please add why here. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 18:52, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Multiple people have reverted the IP. Continue to do so until he/she/it gives up or gives a compelling reason for making that change. Axem Titanium (talk) 19:04, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Voice cast

Doesn't the section Voice cast require clean up? It's a bit messy. It shows all the voice actors without sources or mentions from the developers. Tintor2 (talk) 18:11, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Yes it definitely needs clean up. The sources that are listed are either questionable or no longer linked properly. My suggestions is to make a table, (such as Uncharted#Characters), but it should be made and then absorbed into Characters of Kingdom Hearts because it belongs there more. A little prose can be used here, such as who as voiced the main cast (Sora, Riku, Kairi, Mickey, etc) but everything else should be on that page. All the English actors can be sourced from here (this is for KH). I've found this site useful and reliable. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 18:34, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
Im usually against unnecessary tables but in this case it might be best to add one forbthe cast. Especially considering Kairi's VA changes alot.Lucia Black (talk) 21:10, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
Just outright remove the voice cast and let the character's page handle that sort of information. DragonZero (Talk · Contribs) 23:28, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
I would be fine with removing it. Instead of outright deleting it, could we add a bit in the Disney and Square Enix characters section, like I mentioned above, with just the main characters?
Also, if we are doing this, I feel that the Disney and Square Enix characters section should come out of Common elements, be retitled to Characters, and have a paragraph added before what is already there, BRIEFLY summarizing the main characters (this is where the also brief voice acting info could go). - Favre1fan93 (talk) 23:42, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
Tough call. Having Disney and SE before characters seems to strengthen the implication that characters from other franchises are a common theme here. The main characters themselves are pretty simple so I wouldn't introduce them. The story does a good job of leading the general readers on for the characters, such as introducing Riku and Kairi as friends. DragonZero (Talk · Contribs) 00:08, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
I really must not have been paying attention to the Characters of Kingdom Hearts page, as I completely missed the section that is already there about the voice cast. Wow. Okay, so definitely support of removal on this page, and then I guess maybe some clean up on that page, if needed. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 02:36, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Kingdom hearts series chronology is wrong.

358/2 comes after Memories,not vice verse.For proof look right next to the board.I don't know how to fix this.Please do it for me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Darthleon13 (talk • contribs) 20:49, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

Memories comes after 358/2 days. They are both concurrent, but 358/2 has more material before Memories to warrant it's place in the chronology. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 22:17, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

the release date for 2,5 remix is wrong

it was released in december at least in english so, since the release date of that is the last release it should contain the last release date of that collection.84.213.46.153 (talk) 23:15, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

The date is correct. We state the first time the same game was released, regardless of the region it released in. And since HD 2.5 is the same across the board (sans language) its release is October. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 00:10, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

Kingdom hearts 3 release date announcement.

In japan kingdom hearts 3 will be released this november of 2015. In north america kingdom hearts 3 will be released on march 31st 2016 . In australia kingdom hearts 3 will be released on september 29th 2016. In the EU & the UK kingdom hearts 3 it is expected to be released on september 30th of 2016. This is KMJ enjoy and thank you... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.189.124.242 (talk) 16:49, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

Story section too detailed

I think the plot written in the story subsection goes beyond what Wikipedia judges as a well written plot section. To quote the "Plot" template:

"The objective of a summary is to condense a large amount of information into a short, accessible format. It is not to reproduce the experience of reading or watching the story, nor to cover every detail. For those who have not read or seen the story, it should serve as a general overview of the major points. For those who have, it should be detailed enough to refresh their memory — no more."

For an article on the series as a whole, the plot summary must be a general overview of the series as a whole, not a game-by-game description. As such, I've added the plot cleanup template to the article. Thoughts? User:Immblueversion (talk) 15:33, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

@Immblueversion: I have reverted many of your recent edits to KH articles, mainly because it seemed as though you were removing references from the story sections. I get if you want to "trim some of the fat" from the plot, but you should be able to do so while retaining the refs, especially on Good and Featured Articles. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 02:49, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Kingdom Hearts. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 10:58, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 18 external links on Kingdom Hearts. 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) 20:37, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Kingdom Hearts. 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) 19:45, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

Union X the Ninth Installment?

How is Union X the ninth installment when it's clearly just an updated version of the previous KH X game from browsers made for iOS? It's just like how Re: Chain of Memories and Re: Coded are updated versions of the previous original games (Chain of Memories and Coded)--AnimeDisneylover95 (talk) 00:52, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

Please join the discussion regarding this at Talk:Kingdom Hearts χ#Union X as the Ninth Installment?. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 16:01, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

Merge in Kingdom Hearts Mobile

There are no other references that I can find or ProtoDrake could find, and we don’t need a permanent C class, so it’s better that it be merged in here or redirected. Attention @PresN: Judgesurreal777 (talk) 21:04, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

I'm on the fence- it seems like a minor enough title with barely any real-world impact to be mergeable, but also there is just enough tiny articles about it (aka just a bit more than a recycled press release) to support it's own article? --PresN 02:12, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
True, the other question @PresN: is can the existing Kingdom Hearts main article absorb the information well if we tried to merge? If it was too much that would be an issue. But if no more development is coming... or reviews.... Judgesurreal777 (talk) 02:30, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
Is there a possibility that more eyes and attempts on sourcing might help it? Or have basically all avenues been depleted? - Bryn (talk) (contributions) 22:12, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
I can't see anything. I had a look for sources to expand the article for Judgesurreal777, but found nothing. I'd Support merging. --ProtoDrake (talk) 22:33, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
I'd actually oppose merging. It seems like a solid small article in my eyes, even if more sourcing can't be found. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 22:37, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
Is there anyway we can find a record of how many people created a KHM account or so?Blue Pumpkin Pie Chat Contribs 22:54, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
Ahh, but that the difficulty @Favre1fan93:, it’s so solid it is unlikely to grow. We can always expanded it back out if we find more, but is our goal to build C articles? Better to have a strong Featured Article than a weaker one and a separate C. After all we already merged in that V-cast kingdom hearts browser or mobile game I believe a number of years ago, and it sits quite happily in the parent article. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 23:38, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
So what’s the consensus, we want a permanent C? Or are we waiting for the game to have more notability? Or should we merge it until such time, if ever, it has enough notability to grow beyond C? This will be a hard block to the resurrection of the Kingdom Hearts Good Topic if it remains loose like this. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 19:33, 15 June 2020 (UTC)
I have a feeling that there is information out there, but its incredibly harder to look for as searching kingdom hearts mobile" in both katakana and english searches automatically take me to kHX/UX/DR.Blue Pumpkin Pie Chat Contribs 21:56, 15 June 2020 (UTC)
Well I found some sources for development, so lets explore this first. That does not mean we should not round back to this subject later if it can’t achieve B or GA. So lets end this review :) Judgesurreal777 (talk) 22:42, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Series chronology template discussion

Template:Kingdom Hearts chronology, which is used on this article and associated articles, is being discussed at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2021 July 16. There is also a more general discussion regarding the use of similar chronology templates at WT:VG. Musashi1600 (talk) 14:47, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Draft article

"Kingdom Hearts IV"

This is a notice that there is a draft for the game "Kingdom Hearts IV" at Draft:Kingdom Hearts IV until such a time that it is ready for inclusion in the mainspace. All are welcome to come help nurture the article's development there. Indagate (talk) 18:48, 10 April 2022 (UTC)

Melody of Memory as a game in the main series?

I'm pretty new to Kingdom Hearts, but it seems to me that Melody of Memory is a spin-off rhythm game, featuring gameplay different from the rest of the games in the "main series" (which are RPG games). I'm therefore unsure why it is in the main Games section, rather than the "Other" section? Kidburla (talk) 22:22, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

While Melody of Memory does have a different game paly style. I wouldn't call it a spin off. Just as I wouldn't call Chain of Memories a spin off. Melody of Memory does have information relevant to the main story line of Kingdom Hearts, despite being much different than other games in the series. 174.250.193.255 (talk) 16:11, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Kingdom Hearts V-CAST release dates

Apologies if this isn't the proper place to ask about this sort of thing (I'm not super familiar with Wikipedia's standards but thought I'd ask here rather than just making a random edit) but both the release dates for the Kingdom Hearts game released on Verizon's V-CAST service appear to be incorrect. The US release is stated to be "February 4, 2005" but the references linked state it was February 1st (as does this press release on Verizon's website). The Japanese release date however appears to be entirely fictitious, as I cannot find any mention of this game releasing in Japan prior to this date's addition to this article. The only mention of Kingdom Hearts I could find on Famitsu.com from that year was the release of Chain of Memories and the version of this article over on the Japanese language Wikipedia makes no mention of a Japanese release, only a US one. Is there any info to the contrary or am I free to make corrections to this article? Firefang9212 (talk) 21:59, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Kingdom_Hearts/Archive_6&oldid=1177721292"