Talk:Final Fantasy VII/Archive 3

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

→

Archive 7

PC version

Can someone put back up the difference between the ps1 version and the pc version? Someone deleted it.

Trivia

We should make a trivia section for this game. I noticed that the Super Nova in the english version is different from the Japanese version. In the Japanese version, he just makes an explosion. In the english version, he makes meteor go into the sun and makes an explosion.

Advent Children

I noticed that the Compilation part of the article had no reference to Advent Children. So, I wrote a small summary:

Final Fantasy VII: Advent Children — The movie sequel to Final Fantasy VII, ocurring two years after the events detailed in the game. The population of Midgar, still dealing with the aftermath of Meteor, has also to deal with a mysterious disease called Geostigma. Meanwhile, the ex-members of AVALANCHE face a new menace, three "remnants" of Sephiroth's will named Yazoo, Loz and Kadaj, while Cloud seeks atonement for his past sins.

Hope you find it good and useful. ;) Oh, and it also lacks a reference to Dirge of Cerberus.

EDIT: Oh wait, I just changed something. "Meteor strike" just doesn't sound good.

Oh damn, I think I took the "Prequel" part out by accident. Can someone please write it back? Sorry...

Request

I request that someone please write a detail account of the story for Lunar:_Silver_Star_Story and Final_Fantasy_VII. Lunar SSS and FF7 are classic RPGs, but their story section is highly summarized. For an example of a detail account of the story, section, please look at FF6.

In the story section of Final_Fantasy_VI, a lot of details are given, such as Kefka poisoning the water supply in the siege of Doma Castle, Terra unable to accept herself being a half-esper, the balance of the world is destroyed, etc. However in the summarized FF7 story section, nothing is mentioned about the death of Aeris in the hands of Sephiroth, Meteor threat, Tifa helping Cloud overcoming his psychological problem, etc.

Request: If anyone have free time and can write a good article, please spend some time writing a more detailed story for Lunar SSS and FF7.

Talk clean-up

I am going to start going through the talk page and moving old discussion to the end under an archive section until we are ready to move them into the actual archive area. If there are any objections to this, just yell at me. Tetsuo 15:39, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Why was Compilation merged?

What the hell? The compilation had its own article, and for good reason. I also saw no talk for merging. I'd like to know why.

~regruBgniK

There was a merge tag actually.

Personally, I thought the article was better alone. The compilation is continually growing and its cluttering up the FFVII article, and it was easier to just go to the compilation page rather than trudging through the FFVII article to get to the info.--Claude 06:44, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Censorship

My comment was based on having played both versions, nothing more. I don't recall anyone ever saying "Shit" in the PC version, which happens on a fairly regular basis in the PSX version, for example. PurplePlatypus 22:54, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

I actually read an article in GamePro magazine before the game was released in the US that said the ESRB was considering giving the game an 'M' rating due to the whole Honey Bee Inn thing. If I could find the issue it was in, we could include it in the Title and release information heading. ~ Hibana 23:19, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

I skipped the HBI on my only complete playthrough in the last few years, so I don't actually know how that came out in the two versions. I was only referring to the dialogue. But this does sound like a potentially interesting line of inquiry. (I know some of the dialogue most in need of a better translation was around that part of the game, too.) PurplePlatypus 03:32, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

I can substantiate this; a number of instances of profanity which remained in the Playstation version's script were rendered as comic symbols in the PC version's script. I have no idea WHY, but... UOSSReiska 22:58, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Spaces

An anonymous user seems to have just spent a great amount of their (free) time putting two spaces between all the sentences in the article. I know that this is gramatically correct, but does this even matter on Wikipedia? You could put five spaces and it would still appear as only one space in the actual article. ~ Hibana 18:22, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

I don't think it matters but I don't really care how many spaces there are after a space either, as long as it isn't more than two. For what it's worth, I just saw that the edit also broke the [[Mako (Final Fantasy VII)#The_Lifestream|Lifestream]] link by removing the right bracket, so I put it back in. --70.25.168.90 23:47, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
- I've run into this a few times, and I never understand why people spend time on it. It goes along with people who go through an article and change all the [[10 January]] dates to [[January 10]] for no reason. --Pagrashtak 01:09, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
People do this because in some writing formats, one space is required between sentences and in others, two are required. It is the same with date formats. In many non-American countries, peopel format the date DD MM YYYY. This is even done in the numerical date representation, making dates a big headache for international businessesTetsuo 15:48, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

FFVII Wiki Cleanup

The long and short of what I'm saying here is that Wikipedia looks like a Final Fantasy fansite. Cloud's page looks like a biography, Advent Children's looks like the reports that came out of Venice when the film was first screened there, just yesterday I had to merge Ultima Weapon with Weapons, and then we've got a plethora of unnecessary random pages.

Final Fantasy VII and Final Fantasy X are the worst about the whole thing. Head over to the Final Fantasy X Talk Page to see what I'm talking about in regards to it.

Final Fantasy VII's problem is that some pages are downright unnecessary. Until recently, there was even a page for the damn Sister Ray. Here's what needs to be addressed:

Midgar (there's nothing that warrants it not being in the List of Final Fantasy VII Locations page; there's hardly so much to say about it that a general interest venue can't keep it sounding interesting without writing about everything from its newspapers to its schools).
Materia (crystalized form of Mako; same attributes apply to both).
Mako (condensed form of Lifestream which can crystalize into Materia; same attributes apply to both).

This is what I propose:

Midgar is merged with List of Final Fantasy VII Locations.

There's no reason for all this stuff to be scattered across Wikipedia when it can conveniently and reasonably fit on shared pages. Thoughts? Ryu Kaze 09:18, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

Have you visited Wikipedia:WikiProject Final Fantasy? A lot of work is being done there to remove non-notable article and make merges like you suggest. You would do better to suggest it there. --JiFish(^Talk/_Contrib) 12:04, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I've joined it, but didn't think to do that. That was a good suggestion. I've put up a notice over there. Ryu Kaze 12:32, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

Honestly, if any individual location from the Final Fantasy series deserves its own article, it's Midgar. That being said, I'm not entirely convinced that any individual location from the Final Fantasy series actually does deserve its own article :). I'm sitting on the fence here: I'm concerned that the Midgar article is acting as a beacon for fancruft (I just removed an entire section on similarities to Metropolis that was a patent violation of WP:NOR), and I don't think it's long enough that it can't be merged into a list article. The problem is that in its current state, I don't think the content of this article belongs in List of Final Fantasy VII locations. The entries in that list are brief and largely geographical, whereas this article contains a lot of background information. I emphatically do not feel that expanding each entry in the list is a good idea, but I also don't know if slicing up the Midgar content so that it would fit there is a good idea, either.

I also think that Mako (Final Fantasy VII) might be too detailed and GameFAQs-y in general. Also, I have a feeling that Materia is going to be a more commonly searched for subject (though that's just a gut feeling). My suggestion is to pare down the Mako material into two or three paragraphs and to merge it into either the Materia article (not my personal choice, but there is a connection there) or Final Fantasy VII (where I feel it would fit most comfortably), and to move the current longer article to the Final Fantasy Wiki (like was done with Pyreflies rather successfully, IMO). Materia probably needs some significant copy-editing, but I think it can be kept as a seperate article, at least. Just my two gil, though. – Seancdaug 18:11, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

Strong disagreement on your point that Mako is too detailed. I highly prefer a detailed version over a short version. I'm sure there are a lot of people out there like me who like detailed version. Please don't change it and keep it as it is. Otherwise include two version for this topic, one detail version for people like me who like to read highly detailed wiki, and one short version for people who like short wiki. 218.111.181.180 09:25, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

I assure you I could edit Midgar into the list without looking awkward if that's decided. I'll write a revision of the one currently on the locations page later and put it up.

As for Mako and Materia, I see your point. Materia is going to be on the mind of the average researcher sooner. We do tend to think of things in their applications sooner than their base elements (t.v., computer, and blender before electricity, etc.). Mako could be made to fit here, but I really think it would be more tidy to put it with Materia.

My main gripe with Midgar remaining seperate is that it really isn't necessary on the whole, and it's just an invitation for tons of fancruft -- which means constantly removing references to Metropolis, Akira's Neo-Tokyo, and God knows what else -- as well as an invitation for pages on everything from Lindblum to Costa del Sol to be made. I really can't think of a single other Final Fantasy city that has its own page, and there's not really a reason that Midgar couldn't be made to fit on the location list.

I'll wait a little while for some more feedback from you and anyone else before doing anything. Ryu Kaze 20:03, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I've gone ahead and put up what I propose as the new Midgar section on the List of Final Fantasy VII locations page, but I've saved the original version of that section in case the decision's overruled. Also, be aware that I'm expanding the content of each of the other sections to account for the noticable increase in content that Midgar's getting. By the time I'm done, it shouldn't look at all awkward. I've already edited the eastern and western continents' content and am moving on to the northen continent. The work's almost done. Ryu Kaze 03:13, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Alright, completely finished now. If you'll take a quick look through the list, you'll find that while Midgar is still longer than the other sections, most of the others are of a significant size now as well, and that prevents Midgar from looking out of place -- and being that it's the first one on the list, that should prevent any feelings of disorientation or of a break in the flow of the article.

I've not actually gone through with merging the location articles yet since that hasn't been agreed upon up to now, so at the very least, what we're going to get out of this is a more fleshed-out locations list. Personally, I feel that most of the general interest information about Midgar is in the locations page now, and that having a Midgar page to describe a few events in a bit more detail isn't warranted or worth the headache of weeding fancruft. But, I'm aware that that opinion may only be mine and not shared by the rest of you. So, do we like or do we not like? Ryu Kaze 04:35, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

By the way, I'm going to go ahead with merging Mako with Materia. I've heard back on it from yourself here, and Gamemaker and AustinZ over on the Midgar Talk Page, and there's not been any opposition to the idea so far. I'll save a copy of it over on the Final Fantasy Wiki (after giving it a much needed clean-up), though, just in case it's needed to reverse anything. Ryu Kaze 11:19, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

NOTE: The issue has been settled. The Midgar page will remain. Head over to the List of Final Fantasy VII Locations Talk Page for more details. Ryu Kaze 13:01, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Character links template

Right, now there's {{FFVII character external links}} which I unceremoniously put on all of the character pages. Currently, it links to FFWiki and Square-Enix FF7 site.

Now, it also has fields for fanlistings, but apparently some people went to delete them from some of the character articles. My original idea was to add a link to each character's fanlistings.net-approved™ somewhat prestigious® fanlisting, which was infinitely more fun than watching people add zmillions of links to Random Sites. At least with fanlistings on the articles, we could point to their link lists.

So what's the idea now? I could fix the remaining articles to have links to fan listings and then edit the template to link to them. The remaining issue is, do people agree having links to character fan listings would be a good idea? And does anyone have any good ideas on where else to link to, besides ffwiki and official site? --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 16:46, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

May I ask why you felt is was neccsary to use a template? It seems a bit overkill to me. --JiFish(^Talk/_Contrib) 18:00, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

*furious confused head scratching* Ummm... guess you meant something else. It did occur to me that this might be a bit complex way, but if we have a bunch of characters that are described in several places, why not? --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 19:00, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

A template is a good way to deal with a single link that appears slightly differently on many pages. (As with an interwiki link.) A Final Fantasy Wiki template can be used on more than just the characters from one game, it can be used in practically every Final Fantasy releated article here on wikipedia. It is the grouping of several links for just the Final Fantasy VII characters that confused me. As for why not, well I don't have a reason. I've just never seen it before. --JiFish(^Talk/_Contrib) 19:46, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Chonological Timeline

I was wondering if anyone could post up a Chronological timeline of all the events through out the FF7 game and Advent Children. Maybe starting from the earliest event with Jenova.

Sounds like a good idea, with all the different sources used within this article it is extremely difficult for somebody without prior knowledge of the sources to know the correct order. Plebmonk 17:16, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

It is a nice idea but most of the sources are probably fanmade. ScotchMB 12:29, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Merging in articles

For the merger of Compilation of Final Fantasy VII and Final Fantasy VII technical demo, see a discussion here. ~ Hibana 20:04, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Extremely concerned

This is going to cause significant problems in the future.

1.) By adding 120+ references, it proves that "OMG, these other video game featured articles have only 50! FARC time!" 2.) By adding 120+ references, it makes the other video game FAs (from an outside standpoint) look "uncomprehensive", which perhaps dooms all future attempts and perhaps even past attempts.

Not trying to insult anyone; this is a real concern of mine. People will think that "OMG any video game should have 130 references!" — Deckill e r 04:21, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

I haven't thought about this before, but I completely agree with your concerns. Obviously some games won't require as many references because their content won't touch the length of skyscraper articles like Final Fantasy VII. I've only given the article in its recent form a cursory read; I'm going to assume (see good faith) that none of the references are "vanity references" (references hastily shoved in expressly for the glorification of the massive "References" section). Therefore, I can't see that we should remove any references. To address Deckiller's concerns, we should probably bring this up in WikiProject Computer and Video Games (to prevent said FARC drives). I don't have any other real solution. On a lighter note, I am impressed with what's happened to the article over the past couple weeks. :) --Tristam 04:39, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Actually, it's only been a day and a half :-P — Deckill e r 04:46, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

LOL. Shows how much I'm able to keep up with all the FF articles. On a less sarcastic note, it also shows how damn fast some of you guys are. I'm STILL trundling along at a snail's pace on my super-duper revision of the Square Co. article. :P --Tristam 04:50, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

I used to be about as fast as Ryu, but I've been bogged down with massive 10+ hour shifts at work. By the time I get home, I'm just too tired to edit. I'll get the bulk of Final Fantasy IX done tomorrow, though. — Deckill e r 04:52, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Excellent. Thanks again for taking over. If I stop getting sidetracked then the Square Co. page will eventually look great. --Tristam 04:54, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

No problem, thank you for letting me :) We basically have a formula down now, so video game FAs should continue to be pumped out like McDonalds hamburgers IF this 135 reference issue doesn't get to the FA voters. Heck, the Bush article has about 40 percent of the references! — Deckill e r 04:55, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

The formula is certainly nice, although I tried to diversify FF9 a little bit. Sometimes it feels like the "character performance in battle is determined by numerical values (called "statistics") for attributes such as speed, health, and so on" gets a little old, but it has to be said. Personally, my favorite video game FA is probably Katamari Damacy, since it is very easy to understand even though I've never played the game. Accessibility to the non-expert is always the most noble of priorities. EDIT: Oh, and Katamari Damacy only has thirteen references. :D --Tristam 05:05, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Just now noticing this discussion. Sorry. I wouldn't worry about the references thing. This article is unique in the quantity of its content, how much disagreement there has been about its subject with regard to what is true, and how much cruft exists about it. It really needs all its references, I think. Ryu Kaze 22:14, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Aeri(s|th)

I blocked the edit warring sock, but I was wondering. Why does this article use "Aerith"? I understand using it in the general case (as it's used in the later spin-offs and sequels), but the English-language release was Aeris, and this article doesn't ever mention that once, which seemed a bit odd. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 22:56, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

In fact, there's no acknowledgement of "Aeris" at all, to the point where verbatim dialogue quotes in the references are changed. Why are we retroactively changing the names of characters to what a certain percentage of the fanbase thinks is "right," when the game itself is unambiguous? I understand using Aerith for the name of the character article and in contexts that are referring to Compilation as a whole (as the other games do indeed use Aerith). However, this game uses Aeris and it's somewhat annoying to see that the article doesn't at all acknowledge that. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 23:58, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

As mentioned in our discussion on my talk page, I think we could probably make mention of the fact that it was "Aeris" in the original NA release, but from what I understand (I'll to find out for certain), later releases (either PC or a European release; just what I understand of the situation) used "Aerith". In any event, "Aeris" would technically be the only thing that would qualify as a retroactive change (though it did appear in a translation that was riddled with hideous errors) since the creators themselves always used "Aerith" and have made sure that was reflected in NA releases of other titles.

Also, for that matter, even if "Aeris" was right, we should remain consistent with everything else here in the encyclopedia. Anyway, let me see if I can find out for sure if "Aerith" was used in at least one version of the original game. Ryu Kaze 00:14, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

By the way, if anyone knows of a version that does or doesn't use "Aerith", please mention it. Ryu Kaze 00:17, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

There's no reason at all to be consistent with everything else in the encyclopedia, because the works we're talking about aren't consistent. I'm suggesting that, when talking about FFVII, we use Aeris, and when we're talking about anything else, we use Aerith. Even when speaking in the general case, I suggest the use of Aerith. But it's just plain inappropriate to ignore the spelling in the English-language version of this game of vastly widest distribution, or weigh a less-widely-used name in favor of it.

I think part of this comes from the claim that Aeris is somehow wrong; I've seen many claims that Aerith is preferred by Square, but none that claim that Aeris is somehow a mistranslation (and it's just as reasonable a transliteration, I'm given to understand).

I'm still rather concerned about the use of "Aerith" in the direct quotations; it's inappropriate to be fixing errors for Square when directly quoting a work. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 00:24, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

"Aeris" is just as fine a transliteration, sure, but for that matter, "Bullet" is just as fine a transliteration as "Barret" (that's where the word came from). The creators chose other transliterations as their names, though. Anyway, I'm still trying to find out for sure if any copies of plain-and-simple-no-subtitle Final Fantasy VII used "Aerith". So far I'm seeing conflicting reports. One I saw said "Aerith" was used in the UK release and another said it wasn't, so I don't know yet. o.O Ryu Kaze 00:30, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

I still think our guiding principle should be most common usage, and the US PSX release sold more than the PAL and PC releases combined. :/ It wasn't even changed for the Greatest Hits release. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 00:31, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

I can't find any confirmation for the PC and PAL releases, unfortunately. In any event, how can we assume what's the most common usage? EGM, EDGE and other gaming magazines have been using "Aerith" ever since there was ever any conflict over which name was intended, so I wouldn't venture to guess which is used most commonly. Ryu Kaze 00:40, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Okay, after looking at some FAQs in French, Swedish, Portuguese, Dutch, Norwegian and Polish, I've noticed that all of those used "Aeris", so it's probable that the UK version would have as well. Still can't comment on the PC version, though. Ryu Kaze 00:44, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

They've been using Aerith since the announcement of other games that use the name. I'm suggesting Wikipedia's usage reflect this; references specifically to FFVII use Aeris, references to other games and references to the character in all works as a whole use Aerith. More specifically, the Aerith article would use Aeris for the plot summary of FFVII, briefly explaining the inconsistency, and this article would use Aeris more or less exclusively save for the Compilation section, with an explanation of the inconsistency.

I'm basing usage on the distribution of the games; FFVII's English-language PSX releases vastly outsold the PC release (and North America is the only place the PC release was released anyway), and consumers of games far outnumber those who are motivated to discuss games. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 00:49, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Who do you mean when you say "they"? When I use it I mean Square.

By the way, if no version of the original used "Aerith", then I can see it as somewhat more reasonable to suggest using "Aeris" in this article. I still think it would be inappropriate given that SE's made it clear what the character's name actually is and what they intended it to be — and because it would lead to people trying to change "Aerith" to "Aeris" on all the articles that mention her; uniformity is good in some cases — but if there was a majority agreement that "Aeris" should be used here I wouldn't fight it. I do, however, think it would be a poor decision to have most of Aerith's own article use "Aeris" while the rest used "Aerith" and the article itself was named based on her official name, which has also been attributed to her in the most English-language titles. Ryu Kaze 00:56, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Just remembered that Final Fantasy Tactics also used "Aeris". Of course, it also used "Sephiros" instead of "Sephiroth" and had more translation errors than VII. Ryu Kaze 00:57, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

By the way one more time, according to IGN, the PC version was released in North America, Europe and Japan. GameFAQs, however, only mentions a US release. Confusing enough? Ryu Kaze 00:59, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

They is publications like EGM and EDGE.

I'm arguing that it's not our role to correct "mistakes" made in the source works. This leads down a troubled road of deciding what is and isn't a mistake. The character's name, in Final Fantasy VII, is Aeris; no amount of retconning or wishful thinking or fan consensus or what Square thinks is better is going to change the fact that if I take the black-bottomed disc out of the Final Fantasy VII case and stick it in my elderly PlayStation, the default name for the flower girl with the mysterious connection to Cloud is going to be Aeris.

This character has no animus or existence outside of the works in which it appears, and since it appears in multiple games, it can have multiple names at the same time. While her name was changed for later works, that doesn't mean that Final Fantasy VII itself has changed. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 01:06, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

I'd almost be willing to say we should change all the usage of her name in the article to "Aeris" if you wouldn't refer to it as a retcon or change. It's just not accurate at all, as "Aerith" was and always will have been there first. I own stuff put out before the US release ever came along that says "Aerith". Everything from SE themselves has consistently used that since 1996, and when they became more involved in localization, we began seeing it in all English releases as well. Anyway, I've asked for some people on a FFVII PC version board to tell me what name was used in that. It's a slow board, though, so the response hasn't been immediate. I'll let you know what they tell me (assuming they do).

Again, if the PC version used "Aeris", I won't fight its inclusion here if it's what the majority wants. I'll think it a terrible idea and will be sure to reiterate that for everyone, but I won't fight it. Ryu Kaze 01:15, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Alright, I've been informed that it uses "Aeris" as well. That being the case, if the majority wants it, I won't contest it. I still think we should go with the official spelling for the sake of it being the official spelling, though, as well as for the sake of uniformity within the encyclopedia, but I'll accept the majority ruling in this case. Ryu Kaze 02:17, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

I can confirm that no Final Fantasy VII game uses 'Aerith' as the name. Its use seems to be a rumour conveniently spread as fact when used with the argument. I'd prefer the article to use 'Aeris' for factual integrity, but opinions always collide, so I will settle for a notice stating that the article uses 'Aerith' due to recent localisations of other appearances. --TheEmulatorGuy 06:47, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

I might add that the decision seems to be between unformity and factual integrity. Would you rather information remain constant even if it is incorrect? --TheEmulatorGuy 06:49, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, that depends on what your basis for correct is. If that basis is what appears in the game, then "Aeris" is correct, but if it's what the creators named the character, then "Aerith" would be right. Anyway, your suggestion about the "due to recent localizations of other appearances" line sounds good to me. Ryu Kaze 13:12, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

This isn't an article about the character or the creators, though. It's an article about the game. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 13:28, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Good point. Ryu Kaze 13:32, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

So, what does everyone think we should do about this one? I~~, of course, think we should stick with "Aerith" (though I can see the reasoning behind using "Aeris"; I'd just like to remain consistent~~ and ~~go with what I think is most recognizable; as well as correct, of course, but that's a whole other argument),~~ our resident Emulator chap would prefer "Aeris", the Man in Black would like "Aeris" and... we don't know about the rest of you. I haven't made a note within the article yet, as I don't know what we'll be doing for a permanent solution.

To make an additional argument for keeping "Aerith", I'd like to point out again that — while we've got a worldwide total of roughly 5.79 million people who got a copy of this game with "Aeris" used in it, and then another 1.08 million who got a copy of Tactics using "Aeris" — all titles released outside Japan featuring the use of "Aerith" combined (all of them being more recent than those other two titles) amounts to about 8.14 million copies sold. On the basis of what's been most widely seen and distributed, I'd argue that "Aerith" is at least as recognizable, and all the more so since all English localizations featuring the character released since September 2002 have been using this spelling. There's also the matter of the most well known English video game publications using "Aerith" for years on end now. As time goes on, "Aerith"'s recognition value can only increase, while "Aeris"' will decrease.

~~I also think the idiom of "If it's not broke, don't fix it" applies here.~~ Ryu Kaze 19:13, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

The article is broken because it's based on an essentially fannish change to the game. Why are we giving undue weight to a version of the game not even released in English? No English-language version of this game uses the name "Aerith." This article is about Final Fantasy VII, not any other games. Why are we ignoring the spelling used in the game we're talking about, to the point where verbatim quotes from the game itself are changed?

We're not talking about the name of the character in general, and we're not talking about the series as a whole. This article on the English-language Wikipedia is about the Final Fantasy VII, and to bring up other games and other languages is a red herring. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 20:09, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Dammit. You just reminded me of something. Now that I know that no English versions of the game used "Aerith", I know that whoever made the script I found must have changed it, so that definitely needs to be fixed to read "Aeris". Since I'm a fanatic about consistency, the name used in the article should match the name used in the in-game quotes being used as references for the article.

This line of reasoning wins. I'm striking out my argument. I'll go ahead and fix the references, but await further input before changing all other uses of the name in case someone comes along with a fantastic argument none of us have foreseen. Ryu Kaze 20:41, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

I think whatever is decided in the name of Aerith/Aeris it needs to be consistant on the whole site. A Man In Black made a mention that since this is just an article on the game that it doesn't have to be consistant. I would be inclined to agree except for the sheer amount of localization issues that game had and the global width of this article and all the articles that are linked in this particular one. If this was just one article and it was basically just a repersentation of the game and nothing connected to it, the whole Aerith/Aeris issue would not be one, a mention of the divison in the fanbase would all that would be needed. But this article could be looked at as a tree trunk because everything associated with FFVII is linked from this one page. If conflicting information is littered all the way acrosss each page it would alienate the readers, we have to remember that its not just us reading these its people who are actively trying to get information. One thing that we should do eventually is check each and every article linked to this one and make sure the info is factual, consistent, and does not contradict anything else. Especially with issues like Shera/Sierra and Bahamut SHIN/SIN/Sin/sin to name a few. J-Axe

The problem is, while the information will remain constant, the information will be incorrect when used in this article. Would you prefer consistency so much that you would be willing to be incorrect? TheEmulatorGuy 04:33, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

It's not that it would be incorrect. Rather, it wouldn't consistently represent the subject of the article in a self-contained fashion. Since we're using quotes from the game, we have to use "Aeris" for those, because that's what is actually in the game, incorrect or not. In order for the article to remain consistent with itself, we're going to go have to go with "Aeris" in the rest of it until SE rereleases the game with this error fixed. I still think her name should appear as "Aerith" in all other articles, though, including character articles. Ryu Kaze 14:19, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

As we've now moved into FAC, I'm going to make the judgement call of going ahead with changing all uses of the name within this article to "Aeris". I'll leave a link to this discussion in my edit summary. Ryu Kaze 17:42, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Infobox image

Final Fantasy VII was released on PlayStation and Windows, first in Japan. Is it incorrect to display the North American cover for the PlayStation? Featured article Final Fantasy VI uses the Japanese famicon cover and featured article Final Fantasy VIII uses two infoboxes. I think it would be best to use either:

A second infobox for the Windows version
The original Japanese PlayStation cover
The game logo

I realise Final Fantasy X and Final Fantasy X-2 use the North American PlayStation cover, but they have not featured multi-console releases. --TheEmulatorGuy 04:33, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

I forget where it is (there are too many style articles), but we're supposed to go with the image that would be most familiar to an English audience or best represents the subject. The Japanese cover is used at Final Fantasy VI because it actually says "Final Fantasy VI", whereas the NA cover said "Final Fantasy III". The Windows version's cover actually was on here. I guess somebody must have removed it without me noticing. Hm. Now that it's been brought up, I wonder if it will affect the layout of the gameplay images any if it's added back. It probably should be, though. Ryu Kaze 14:05, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

I removed the Windows cover when I condensed the infoboxes. We really only need one image for identification; the recurring themes are Cloud, industrial machinery, and greys and greens, all of which are present in that cover. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 18:05, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Fair enough point. It was a good idea to remove it for that reason, if nothing else, but the fact that it helped the page layout certainly doesn't hurt. Ryu Kaze 19:15, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Cait Sith?

On the character section why does Cait Sith go to its Celtic history and not the character? Anyone on a page about FFVII and finds a link to a character would not be wanting the link to the orgin of the name or word and instead want the character himself. But instead of just changing the link myself I want to make sure this wasn't something I did not know about. So any reason it is like the way it is, anyone opposed to moving it to the character? J-Axe

That was just a link error. With names like "Cait Sith" and "Sephiroth" you have to put "(Final Fantasy VII)" after the active part of the link. Ryu Kaze 14:07, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Barret/t?

I dunno if anyone else has noticed, but in the screenshot for a battle, Barret's name is spelled "Barrett". Just a heads up. Axem Titanium 22:44, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm really pissed!!

THIS ARTICLE DOESN'T SAY IT HAS SPOILERS!!

I just started playing this game and it's the ONLY Final Fantasy I haven't played from 1 to 8. I've been eager to play it for quite a long time now...

And guess what, now I know Aeries dies!! I'M SO PISSED!

Never thought my love for Wikipedia would turn into hate so god damn quickly!

PS: For those who may want to know more info, I was reading the "Legacy" part when I read the spoiler (which isn't EVER warned...).

I realize, now, that there's even a screenshot of Aeris being killed, in the Story section. However, I had (luckyly) missed it because I had skipped the Plot and the Story and all of that, because I didn't want spoilers. I still got them anyway in the "Legacy" section, when all I wanted to read was some criticism!!! Damn you all. :( —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.125.31.234 (talk • contribs)

Please be civil. However, by searching for a subject on wikipedia, you must be aware that wikipedia has spoilers. One of the most basic principles of wikipedia is that wikipedia is not censored and therefore will try to cover a topic in a comprehensive manner. Obviously, that would include plot points as major as that and if you expect otherwise, you are sadly mistaken as to what wikipedia really is. Axem Titanium 03:21, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Sorry about that dude but if you have played 1-8 you must be a fan and awhile back (if memory serves) there was a discussion about whether or not to put a spoiler about that but it was decided that Aeris/Aerith dieing is such common knowledge that a spoiler tag is not needed. As many as you have played I'm really suprised you didn't know that.J-Axe

How about including some other screenshot/picture instead? I personally think a mention or description of the event is enough. Skorpio-88

Okay, who is pushing their viewpoint with an IP sock here? — Deckill e r 03:57, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Seems clear that someone is. In any event, that scene is probably the most iconic moment in RPG history, mustless this single game. The screenshot is entirely appropriate. We don't care about "protecting" people from learning things here. Learning is what the page is here for. We're here to provide knowledge. Those who don't want it should avoid Wikipedia. I'm not going to insert a warning to suggest that — in my opinion — you should avoid looking at something because I think you might not want to see it. My concern is providing the information and making it as accessible as possible, whether you want that information or not. The article is supposed to provide knowledge while presenting all the information impartially. That is all I or any other editor should be concerned with. Ryu Kaze 12:31, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, all I'm asking for is a little spoiler tag. After all, they ARE spoilers. No matter how iconic and important and common knowledge. They're spoilers. Come on? They can spoil the game to people. It just happened to me a few hours ago. (By the way, it's me again - person that wrote this comment).

I'm an avid fan of Final Fantasy, and have played all from 6 onwards, and even I'm annoyed that there's no spoiler tag here. Every single other page on Wikipedia that contains spoilers denotes so with the spoiler tag. Seriously guys, just because "it's common knowledge that she dies" (which is utter tripe if you ask me; it's common knowledge if you know it already) that doesn't mean you break the conformity of every other article. Some people will come here not having played the game, and it's shameful that you would spoil a pivotal moment of the game for them for no reason. It's a spoiler. Use a spoiler tag, and remove the image - I'm all for making a complete knowledge source, but there are ways to do it that won't upset anyone. Darric 15:50, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

No, every other article containing plot details on Wikipedia does not contain that tag. Many editors loathe them, and they are not a requirement by any stretch of the imagination. Not only do they not show up in the manual of style, but the site-wide disclaimer accessible from the bottom of every single page of Wikipedia states quite clearly that information some people may find objectionable (including plot details) might appear in any and every page, and there may be no warning for them.

This is an encyclopedia. It is about promoting learning, not ignorance. This is a highly notable aspect of the game and it merits the coverage it receives with that image. By the way, I didn't make the "common knowledge" argument; I made the more obvious argument that we're here to promote learning, not to protect people from knowledge. There's no requirement that spoiler tags be present, and many find them to be not only redundant, but a violation of Wikipedia is not censored.

It's presumptuous to call something a "spoiler". Knowledge ruins a work of fiction? Why then will that knowledge not ruin it when you watch/read it yourself? The argument makes no sense. You can't assume what does or doesn't "ruin" something for other people, pass your judgement on that, and then attempt to influence readers not to learn because of what you think. That's not how it works. For some people, knowing what's going to happen isn't even so important as how events are presented. We can't assume that we — supposedly operating under a neutral point of view princicple in which we don't attempt to persuade readers' opinions about any information, or to persuade them to learn certain info while ignoring other info — know what's best for others and attempt to act upon that. It's not what we're here to do. We're here to provide knowledge and to make it accessible. That's all. This discussion has been gone over thoroughly with regard to video game articles, including this one. Ryu Kaze 16:11, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

P.S. What you're asking for is also essentially a tornado of spoiler tags that would aesthetically mar the article. Look at how many sections of this page include plot details. Ryu Kaze 16:12, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi, it's me again (person that wrote this comment). I just wanted to give you guys a link to the page where people vote to feature this article. I made a long post there explaining some stuff - this goes to all those who don't believe and/or bash me. Check it out... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Final_Fantasy_VII It's the part that says "OPPOSE ... This article just spoiled the game for me.".

PS: Ryu Kaze, man, I think you're getting it kinda wrong here. So much about knowledge and learning and the meaning of an encyclopedia. But man this is not the meaning of life. This is an article about a game. Ok, think about this, for instance: would YOU like it if you saw an unwarned spoiler that totally screwed up the game for you? Especially such an important event like the death of Aeris. ... ... It's not so hard to add just one or two spoiler tags to warn about the MAJOR spoilers, such as that one. Wouldn't hurt anyone to do it.

One more thing, that came to my mind from what Darric pointed out:

From my experience with Wikipedia, and my reading of several articles about movies/games/books and other stuff, I noticed that they all have some kind of "common pattern". First the introduction, then some synopsis and plot detail ALWAYS WITH SPOILER TAGS, and then the rest of the article (impact, legacy, controversy, blah blah blah). Here is an example: The Matrix. So, when I came to this article, I just did what I thought was right: I skipped the "Plot" and "Story" sections. Since every other article about movies/games/books seemed to be similar to me, I thought I had skipped all the spoilers, and thought I wasn't going to get one in another section. So, maybe you should try doing something like the article example I just gave you?

NOTE: I have not read the entire The Matrix article, actually, I barely even read it. Maybe it sucks and I have no idea, but I just wanted to show you how it clearly separates spoilers from the rest of the article, using only a few tags. I have seen MANY articles like this.

Once again, not every article uses spoiler tags, and no article is required to. I regret that you feel this experience has somehow ruined the game for you (you've not even played it yet; how did you determine that this has ruined it?), but the universal dislcaimer makes it clear that readers shouldn't expect warnings for things like this. Wikipedia's founder has even expressed a dislike for such things. And personally, I read everything about a book, movie or game before reading/watching/playing it, so I would appreciate someone telling me about it, not hate them. Again, to many people how something is presented is as important as what occurs. We can't assume what does or doesn't "ruin" things for people. It's not what we're here to do. We're here to provide knowledge, plain and simple.

By the way, perhaps you should take your own advice and calm down. If it's "just an article about a game", then why are you so worked up? Ryu Kaze 16:43, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Ok man whatever you win. :D I don't wanna waste more time discussing this stuff. I just wanna go and continue playing FF7 .... Because I barely have time to be on the computer at all.

But I'm asking you to keep this issue in mind. Many a gamer may have been/may be dissapointed by those unwarned spoilers, just like me. That's not very nice for all the people who don't like to have the suspense and thrill ruined (that is, most people).

Just consider it, and good luck passing FAC. -Magellan.

Thanks, and don't forget to check out the rest of the internet for unencyclopedic coverage of games. AMHR285^(talk) 21:44, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for the good luck, Magellan, and believe me, were this anywhere on the internet other than Wikipedia, I'd be right there with you on providing spoiler tags. Ryu Kaze 01:20, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

I'd just like to point out my final thoughts; woe be me to actually attempt to sway the opinion of an editor on this free, public encyclopedia:

I wasn't proposing a "tornado" of spoiler tags. A single tag before the first plot details would suffice. All that matters in my mind is that you let people know "Warning, the following text DOES CONTAIN SPOILERS. Go away if you would like to enjoy this story like any other human being." (For the record, this isn't a fact that's made obvious by wikipedia to the lay reader). As for my view in this regard - I played the game back in 1999. Aeris' death was spoiled for me in entirely different circumstances - at the time I hated the person who spoilt it. Believe me, it severely hampered my appreciation of that moment when it occurred. And frankly, if I may say so, your argument about the inconsistency with obtaining the knowledge as you read/play it, *not* spoiling a story is garbage. It's not knowledge of the event, it's how you obtain that knowledge that matters. If this weren't the case, why would we read books at all when we could just come to Wikipedia?

The image that has been chosen for the plot details is iconic, maybe, but there is absolutely no stipulation that requires this image to be *the* representative image. There are a million and one iconic images (Sephiroth emerging from fire? A sweep shot of Midgar?) that could be used without spoling the game. The reason I'm so vehemently opposed to this image is that, say for example a user hits this page. Suddenly they realize "wait, this could contain spoilers". So they skim the page to the bottom for, say, the links. And without even trying, or so much as skimming the text, the spoiler's in their face. It's unnecessary, does not add to "the knowledge" that you're so adamant on exposing - and the mere fact that it's the only image for the entire plot section illustrates this.

In all, I'm just amazed that your reason for excluding the spoiler tag (which, as Magellan said, is included on almost every single other wikipedia page that I've seen, to the extent that I was immediately wondering where it was on this page) is because - it will make the page look ugly? Are you serious? It angers me no end that something that means this much to any number of people is being overlooked for so daft a reason. It's easy to look at this from the point of view of someone who's played the game without it getting spoiled, but believe me, anyone who cares at all for story - arguably the definitive feature of a Final Fantasy - will be extremely opposed to having the story spoiled in so blunt a way, when all they wanted was maybe to see what this game they've heard so much of was all about. Darric 15:09, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

See the major problem with this arguement is that most people who wanted to play the game have already or has seen Advent Children or is now playing Dirge of Cerberus and will in all likilyhood not be able to play FFVII anymore due to its rarity, people who have not played the game are coming here to learn about what they have missed. And if they spend the big bucks on ebay for a new copy or take the chance of getting a used one somewhere they probably already know about Aerith's death. And to leave out such a huge plot point on this game is just downright wrong. Also if someone has not played this game and is just starting it for the first time why would you come to an encyclopedia article on it? If you don't want the story "messed up" for you why would you look it up? I personally don't care if a spoiler tag is used or not but in Ryu Kaze's defense you don't have to put one and it can break up the look or momentum of an article very needlessly. And in my opinion the more detailed the descripton of an older game the better. If I want to go back and look up a game like FFIII means I have either played it (I haven't though) or I want to learn about it b/c of the trouble it would take to actually get a copy of it. I think the article is fine the way it is but if people want to vote for a spoiler tag it might solve this issue. J-Axe

And whoever made the game actually hints the death of Aerith. Insert disc 2 into a PS and start the game, it shows the movie when she dies. The creaters did not care about giving away that partcular plot before you got to that part of the story. I have no idea why people stress so much on reading spoilers. Knowing what will happen does not spoil it, because you still get to know how will it happen and why will it happen. Thinking of it as spoiling the story spoils it, not reading or hearing the spoiler does. At least that's what I see in most extreme spoiler haters that actually spoils the fun of others that really doesn't care about hearing one. It is more like a phobia rather than just a preference. MythSearcher 17:10, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

To those who replied: J-Axe, don't assume that because most people who come here have played the game, everyone will have. My concern is for those who come to this page not having played the game, and it's moronic to assume noone fits that description. Mythsearcher, If you insert disc 2 before you're there, that's hardly because the developers wanted you to spoil the game. That's because you skipped to the end of the novel, as it were.

On reflection, I've come to understand Ryu Kaze's view. It essentially states thus: Wikipedia does not care if the information it presents spoils the game, because the function of Wikipedia is to provide information. I don't mean that in a negative way, and let me say, on reflection, I agree fully.

However. This is no justification for not providing a minor tag whose purpose is to make this vast font of knowledge maybe a touch less intrusive. To disregard that over mere aesthetics is a practice I can't understand. Regarding the image, I ask you to look at it from this point of view: Why is *that image* included? Could it be changed for another image of equal effect? If we do so, could we achieve a point where everyone is satisfied? That's all I'm asking. Find an image that illustrates a iconic point of the story but which doesn't so immediately reveal a plot point. In my mind, the image does little more than say "Look, Sephiroth kills Aeris with a big sword." Changing it will not remove any of the information this page provides, but it will make a lot of people happy, now and in the future. Can't we hit a happy medium where the page provides detailed info for those that want it, but doesn't intrude on those that don't? If the answer is 'no', then that's all I have to say, and I will have officially lost hope in Wikipedia as a medium for the masses. Darric 20:46, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

I did not mean everyone who comes here has played the game I meant that some have and those who havent are either learning about what they missed or are just now starting the game but the ones who are starting it are a much smaller percentage than those who have either played it or have not at all. And for myself I still can not understand why someone who has not played/watched/read the game/movie-show/book would come to an encylopedia article about it, that is leaving you completely open for reading something you didn't want to know about. As for the picture of Sephiroth and Aerith, its used for two reasons: 1) its meaning (and yes it has meaning look at this whole arguement) and 2) its quality. Unfortunetly the game does not have the best graphics so only a few of the scenes in the game are a high enough quality that everyone could look at it and understand what is going on. Putting a picture up of Cloud and the rest of gang standing around Sephiroth would be a great picture too except cut down to fit in the page well and due to its quality would look horrible and even a caption would not do the picture justice for what is being accomplished in the scene. The few scenes that could be used well that I remember being full CGI are the party escaping Shin-Ra in the vehicles, Aerith dieing, Cloud finishing off Sephiroth, and metor right above Midgar. But if anyone of those with the exception of escape of Shin-Ra pics are used we would be having this same arguement. And hitting a happy medium is what this whole arguement page is all about. Most of the stuff on here are not misspelling or misinformation its people trying to change the stuff on the article because they see it differently. J-Axe

Well, It is designed so that whatever disc you insert can start the game at the very begining, the only difference is the opening sequence. It shows the sequence then askes you to change the disc not askes you to change the disc before the sequence. It is just a little extra from the developers. It is perfectly common for a player to come over an online or published material that says "hey, try to insert disc 2 to start the game, there's some secret movie." So? do you call that a spoiler? I did not skip to the end of the novel, and disc 2 and the plot material we are concerning here is far from the end. It is more like the author published 2 books for the same story, the first one having a perfectly ordinary writting style, putting the story in a normal time interval, and the second book putting one of the later occuring scene in the begining and using that method to attract readers to keep on reading.

There is actually a type of writting that puts the main event in the begining of the story and attracts people into the story. FF Tactics is one of them. The first battle is totally irrelervant to the next whole chapter, and it is just a spoiler of what will happen. It does not affect the story as you have no idea what, when, how, why, where will it happen.

Try Star Wars, if you have actually watched episode 4, 5 and 6 before you watch 1, 2 and 3(which is filmed after 4, 5 and 6) you would have known perfectly who will turn to evil. Yet it is not going to spoil the story because you do not know how and why. It is actually more interesting because you do not know when.

Stop being over-reacted to spoilers, it is not the spoilers that ruin the story, it is you yourself that keep thinking it does that ruined it.

I do agree adding a tag or two is good, why not just add it to the very begining to warn anyone that is soooo extreme that they cannot even afford seeing the tiniest trace of the plot? I am telling you, it is everywhere and you cannot hide from it as long as you try to read anything about it. MythSearcher 03:01, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

"On reflection, I've come to understand Ryu Kaze's view. It essentially states thus: Wikipedia does not care if the information it presents spoils the game, because the function of Wikipedia is to provide information."

Exactly. We're here to promote knowledge. If somebody comes here and learns something they didn't know before, that means we're doing things properly. When we come to Wikipedia, we come to participate in its mission as neutral editors, our only objective being the professional, impartial, highly accessible presentation of a comprehensive body of notable, verifiable knowledge. Wikipedia's mission — and, thus, ours — has no concern with warning people away from knowledge of any kind, including that which they may not want. That's why there's a content disclaimer that states that information people might not like is here, and why Wikipedia doesn't censor anything. People have wanted to use similar tags on images of pornography or human mutilation/torture here on Wikipedia before, but they were shot down in accordance with these policies. Only the spoiler tags keep getting defended to the death, for whatever reason. Of the three types of "offensive content" I've mentioned, I can't imagine how plot details are the one with the biggest impact on people's lives. They're certainly not the one that makes them look at the opposite sex differently or requires them to seek professional counseling.

"This is no justification for not providing a minor tag whose purpose is to make this vast font of knowledge maybe a touch less intrusive. To disregard that over mere aesthetics is a practice I can't understand."

There were two paragraphs above the line about how they would make the article look awful. The main issue here is Wikipedia not looking like a hypocrite. "Relevant images of a woman giving oral sex to men and women: looks good to me. Relevant images of US soldiers torturing at least one man to death: not a problem. Plot details: oh — oh my God... oh my God! Plot details! Mothers, cover your children's eyes! Get a warning in here! Nevermind official policy!"

"It's easy to look at this from the point of view of someone who's played the game without it getting spoiled..."

I can't say I've ever been there. I knew about Aeris' death before I played the game.

"...anyone who cares at all for story - arguably the definitive feature of a Final Fantasy - will be extremely opposed to having the story spoiled in so blunt a way..."

All I care about those games for are their stories. I still am not bothered by knowing the details of their plots in advance, nor has my enjoyment of any of them been hampered in any way that I'm aware of as a result. By making the claim you just made, you presumed to be speaking for a lot of people, including me. We can't make this assumption, act on it, and then attempt to influence readers because of it. That's why there's a neutrality policy for how info is presented in articles. A warning is most obviously not a neutral placement.

"...when all they wanted was maybe to see what this game they've heard so much of was all about."

In that case, they'll have to read about Aeris' death. That's the most notable story-related aspect of the game.

"Regarding the image, I ask you to look at it from this point of view: Why is *that image* included? Could it be changed for another image of equal effect?"

Because of what I said above: it is the most notable aspect of the story. You can't talk about that game's story without talking about Aeris' death. Not if you want to talk about why it's important and why it's such a milestone in gaming history. It's the most enduring aspect of its legacy. For that matter, the editors in video game publications mention it casually without any warnings. Most of them said years ago that they would no longer warn about it.

Anyway, long story short: if you're going to provide a comprehensive overview of the game to the uninitiated, you can't warn people away from one of the most important aspects of it.

"If the answer is 'no', then that's all I have to say, and I will have officially lost hope in Wikipedia as a medium for the masses."

Personally, it would be the opposite for me. If a supposedly professional, neutral encyclopedia started ignoring its own principles of impartiality for the sake of fansite courtesies, I've lost my faith in it. Ryu Kaze 21:33, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi, Im a real life frind of Magellan, the dude that had the game spoiled here. Im the one who had already played FF7 and kept telling him to play it. But I never told him story detailes hehe. :P

Anyway I came here to say that well after reading all this thing I do agree that wikipedia must give the most neutral knowledge, but man if you add a simple spoiler tag it wont change anything in the article. You wont have to change the content!! Just add a few tags!! It can't hurt anybody!! It will actually do more good than bad. :D Think about it.

I agree that Wikipedia, being a neutral and complete encyclopedia, should show EVERYTHING that contributes (or can contribute) to its content. However, I believe that it is in its duty to WARN about what it is showing. It's a simple warning! Like "hi you might not like what you see/read, kthxbye". Just a simple warning...

And hey you cant compare spoilers with pornography or horrible images...... But well, now that you mention it, the article Issei Sagawa does not have horrible images (censorship, I guess?), but in the external links, it links to a website with horrible images, and it even gives a warning about the images... ... (and trust me they are bad, u dont wanna see). So, there you have, another example of censorship being used...

It's because ethics are more important than just showing EVERYTHING, you know? And the content is still there, for those who want to see...

In any case, the argument I am strictly against is the one that says "a spoiler tag would break up the look and/or feeling of an article needlessly". I think that's bullpoo. First because it isnt needless and 2nd because damn, like I said, I believe it is Wikipedia's duty to give a simple warning. That is far more important than the looks of the article getting "ruined" (it's actually not even half that bad) by a simple spoiler tag...

That is all for my part... Take care people.

One of the main issues of this is do we put spoiler tags or not? The thing about spoiler tags is that it takes two tags (spoiler and end spoiler) except that with the amount of info that could be deemed inapporiate or spoiler-ish is not just the plot, 6 tags would have to be used, two for story, two for development, and two for legacy. That would really detract from the overall look of the article. The reason I bring up the other two is b/c Aerith's death is mentioned in both, which is what brought up this arguement. But one of the major reason I do not think that any of the editors want a spoiler tag is because the general population does not need one. A good pocket of people on here already knew about the death of Aerith before they played it (myself included) but that did not spoiler the game for me because there is a ton of stuff that happens in there and for one little scene to literally spoiler it for you is silly. Besides the sheer amount of tags needed for this would turn a very nice, straight-forward article into a mess. J-Axe

"Anyway I came here to say that well after reading all this thing I do agree that wikipedia must give the most neutral knowledge, but man if you add a simple spoiler tag it wont change anything in the article. You wont have to change the content!! Just add a few tags!!"

That would be changing the presentation of the content. The spirit — if not the letter — of Wikipedia's policies demands that presentation doesn't contain the opinions of the editors. If an editor wants to warn someone not to look at something (not to learn something in a place created solely for learning), then they have passed their opinion of some information on to the reader. That's what must be avoided.

"It can't hurt anybody!! It will actually do more good than bad. :D Think about it."

It makes Wikipedia look hypocritical, which does hurt it in my opinion.

"However, I believe that it is in its duty to WARN about what it is showing."

The policies disagree, however. This is why we have no censorship and neutrality policies: to keep editors' opinions out of the articles. There's even a notice at the bottom of every single page of Wikipedia that says that any section of any page might contain content readers don't want to see at any time. There is no duty or obligation to selectively warn people against learning specifically targeted information in a house of knowledge, especially when that information which has been chosen is one of the very most relevant aspects of the subject in question. It's damaging to an explanation of the relevance of the work, if nothing else. It's impossible to comprehensively explain why this work is relevant while not mentioning this aspect of its story.

"It's a simple warning! Like "hi you might not like what you see/read, kthxbye". Just a simple warning..."

Warnings involve personal points of view. Judgements. Bias. These are things that we're not supposed to include in articles.

"And hey you cant compare spoilers with pornography or horrible images......"

Why not? They're all content that some people don't want to see, and they're all relevant in their respective contexts. There's absolutely no difference on that level.

"But well, now that you mention it, the article Issei Sagawa does not have horrible images (censorship, I guess?), but in the external links, it links to a website with horrible images, and it even gives a warning about the images... ... (and trust me they are bad, u dont wanna see). So, there you have, another example of censorship being used..."

But that's a policy violation, not an example of appropriate conduct.

"It's because ethics are more important than just showing EVERYTHING, you know?"

To whom? And how are you defining "ethics"? The "ethics" of Wikipedia involve recognition of its policies. The ethics here are different from the ethics everywhere else. Ethics are not universal. They change from one place to another, geographically and electronically.

"In any case, the argument I am strictly against is the one that says 'a spoiler tag would break up the look and/or feeling of an article needlessly'."

That was a two sentence addendum to two paragraphs that focused on policies and hypocrisy. They were even added in a seperate edit. While it's still a relevant issue, it wasn't the main issue.

"That is all for my part... Take care people."

You do the same. Ryu Kaze 18:25, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, Ryu Kaze, for what's been a great discussion. I think I fully understand your position now and (I daresay!) approve of the decision you've made. I admit that my statement on "losing faith in Wikipedia" was made entirely in vain, and if anything I've gained faith in it. I'll be honest, were it up to me, I'd still have spoiler tags wherever I could put them - if only for my own benefit. I'm an infophile, but I detest knowing anything about stories before I read/play/see them. It's a fair statement that this is entirely my POV, however. Cheers. Darric 22:22, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

You're welcome, and thank you as well. I do believe we understand one another, and you can be rest assured that when I say "Were this any other place on the internet but Wikipedia, I'd be right there with you on including spoiler tags" that I mean it. See you around. Ryu Kaze 03:32, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

I must say that I just came here to write on this discussion page about the same subject: The FF7 article SPOILED my gameplay. Yes, I read evereyone's comments and points of view, and I must say that regardless, I am with Magellan in this one -- simply because the same happened to me. I don't think this article should be a featured article AT ALL, and I will make sure that I vote against it. That's all I have to say on this subject. --Pinnecco 14:03, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for reading the entire thing (if you did). It seems that you fall into the category of people who read wikipedia too much and then blame it for spoiling stuff. No one's forcing you to read it. Yhe content disclaimer clearly says that these spoilers exist and thus are already marked on all articles by default. The editors here are only trying to create a coherent, factual and comprehensive article about the topic, devoid of censorship. Axem Titanium 14:31, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

I still do not understand why people who do not want something spoiled for them come to a site that offers information of a sometimes sensitive nature. Its not a good idea. I don't think that any website wants to turn away users but in this case it might be one of those few times when some people should remain in there bubble and not try to learn about certain things if it might upset them. J-Axe

Plot Summary

I've noticed references in the plot summary to the group of protagonists being referred to as AVALANCHE. Unless there is information to the contrary outside of the game itself, I would be inclined to believe that AVALANCHE was merely the group led by Barret, and largely leaves the game by the time the player leaves Midgar. I recommend a different term, although I'm not sure what it would be. Maratanos 23:42, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

It is true that the other members of AVALANCHE (Biggs, Jesse, and Wedge) are killed early in the game but since Cloud had kind of joined the group and Barret and Tifa were leader and member respectfully it made more sense to just call anyone who joined Cloud, Barret and Tifa a member of AVALANCHE. Plus it sounds better than just "the party did this, the party did that". Makes it sound more offical. And if you really think about it the group did what they set out to do in the beginning *Save the Planet* so why not call them AVALANCHE? J-Axe

In that Maiden who Travels the Planet novella, Aerith introduces herself as a member of AVALANCHE when she meets the spirits of Jessie, Biggs and Wedge in the Lifestream, so it's still the name the main group used. Also, during the game, the group is referred to as "AVALANCHE" by various people a few times after they leave Midgar. Ryu Kaze 02:06, 23 August 2006 (UTC)