Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-12-21 Street Fighter character articles/Archive 1

This is an archive of our previous discussion. Please don't modify it. Flakeloaf 19:23, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

• Initial Impressions

This dispute appears to revolve around whether the most-correct, scholarly name for a Street Fighter character should be preferred against the "common" name in the article title. The dispute is well-summarised at Talk:E. Honda, with the main points being:

• Most SF characters have both a family and a given name
• All but a handful are referred to by a single name during gameplay
• Some SF characters' names have been retconned by later canon and do not appear when that character made their first appearance, which may not necessarily have been in an SF game
• Some characters' names were abbreviated in their first appearance due to space limitations in early machines
• Some canon is exclusive of the games that form the subject of the article and may not be obvious to all players

The Wikipedia policy on article names states, in part (emphasis in original)

"Wikipedia article naming conventions give priority to what the majority of English speakers would most easily recognize, with a reasonable minimum of ambiguity, while at the same time making it easy to link to articles... [N]ames of Wikipedia articles should be optimized for readers over editors; and for a general audience over specialists."

With that in mind, consider kelvSYC's comments:

"Official sources. From the (Japanese) Capcom website on SFA3, we do have it that Sakura and Karin have last names right in the section that introduced the characters (what do you think the text "春日野 さくら" stood for?), as does R. Mika, T. Hawk, and E. Honda in their bios."

It could be argued that the way most readers would find out about a video game would be by playing it, not by consulting a website. The website contains the most-correct names, but are they the most common?

Overuse of disambiguation - not strictly a game thing, but a Wikipedia thing. I believe there is a blurb in WP:NC about trying to disambiguate whenever possible, and only use parenthesis like King (Tekken) as a last resort.

I believe you're thinking of WP:D, which states "Rarely, an adjective describing the topic can be used, but it's usually better to rephrase the title to avoid parentheses". This guideline also instructs us: "When there is another word (such as Cheque instead of Check) or more complete name that is equally clear that should be used." The term "equally clear" is subjective; assumptions about a term's clarity have to be based on the number of people familiar with each term.

"Space limitations and/or use of abbreviation - why is Rugal Bernstein only referred to as "Rugal B." in KOF 98? Why is BlizzardMan in MegaMan Battle Network 5 referred to as "BlizMan" in all but one mention in that game? Why is Johnny Cage solely referred to as "Cage" in the MK1 lifebar but as his full name on the MK3 lifebar? How it appears in in-game text is not the sole factor in how an article should be named"

I agree it should not be the sole determining factor, but again I am forced to wonder aloud whether someone who has only played the game in an arcade would know what the B stood for in Rugal's name without having been told. Johnny Cage is an easy fix because that's what the speech in MK1 called him, where other characters (Sonya Blade) were addressed only by their first/nicknames. Is there a contention that more people have consulted the website and non-game canon materials than have played the games themselves?

"Just because a short version of a name is solely used in a game does not warrant it to be the title of the article about the character, to the exclusion of all other (possibly more complete and/or more descriptive) names."

I want to agree with you. It is important to recognise that video games are programmed with limited space and sometimes this means abbreviating names and letting the player figure out what they stand for; The North American release of Final Fantasy for the NES comes to mind here. A name's being common doesn't necessarily make it proper, and I absolutely 100% see where you and others who support your contention are coming from.

Still, I'm dogged by WP:NAME. The guideline I quoted earlier is amplified by other comments elsewhere:

• "Except where other accepted Wikipedia naming conventions give a different indication, use the most common name of a person or thing that does not conflict with the names of other people or things." WP:NAME#Use_common_names_of_persons_and_things

• "The most used name to refer to a person is generally the one that Wikipedia will choose as page name, even if this sounds awkward for those seeing the name the first time: Alfred the Great is the name most used in literature to refer to this person... If people published under one or more pen names and/or their own name, the best known of these names is chosen." "Anna O., not Bertha Pappenheim" WP:NC(People)#Nick Names

Unless a compelling case can be made for the idea that the canon and metatalk surrounding the game is more widely-known than the games themselves, I would suggest that the most-used names are the ones used in-game to refer to the character during gameplay.

On the Vega/Bison/Balrog debate, I'll again suggest that the most-commonly-used name be preferred in the article title against what may have been "original" or "most scholarly" for the same reasons. I'm working under the (potentially unsafe!) assumption that there are more SF players outside of Japan than within.

I notice that "Vega" already has a disambiguation page that differentiates between Vega the Spanish bullfighter and Vega the leader of Shadaloo, and that Balrog (disambiguation) makes the same distinction. Bison describes the animal with an inline disambiguation for GNU Bison, and M.Bison refers directly to the leader of Shadaloo. It looks like you're a disambiguation away from uniformity (change the disambig notice at the top of Bison to refer to Bison (Disambiguation) and include GNU Bison, M. Bison and Balrog (Street Fighter) there) so the less tinkering one does with those articles the better. Usually I don't like excessive disambiguation, but in this case I think it may be warranted.

In this case it would appear that the need to give the most correct possible names to articles is superceded by the need to make these articles accessible to the largest possible audience (write for readers, not for experts). From that point I've come up with what will probably be the first of many suggestions in this discussion:

Suggestion #1
1. All editors should congratulate themselves and each other for discussing this situation in a calm, constructive manner instead of edit warring and other disruptive behaviour;

2. Articles referring to SF characters should be titled by the names most-often used to refer to the characters during gameplay, including initials if used (T. Hawk);

2b. The article describing Edmond Honda should be titled "E. Honda", because Edmond Honda would be inconsistent with this convention and Honda would require disambiguation;

2c. It would appear that more people understand Vega, Balrog and M. Bison to be the bullfighter, the boxer and the leader of Shadaloo, respectively. Mentions of these three characters in each other's articles should be wikified, and disambiguation pages should specify whether they refer to the Japanese or World versions of these characters. References to these characters should be consistent across the English Wikipedia, which means referring to the boxer as Balrog even when discussing a version of SF that was released only in Japan (although a mention of what that character was called there would definitely be encyclopedic).

3. All articles should begin with the most-correct, full name of the character including kana according to the most recent canon;

4. The full, correct names of SF characters should serve as redirects to their articles, as Dan Hibiki already does. Full names should also be used on disambiguation pages;

5. This practice should be uniform across all SF characters, including those whose full names were introduced at the same time as the character; and

6. WP:Computer and video games should consider adopting a manual of style to address, among other issues, a uniform way of addressing video game characters that complies both with Wikipedia policy and the need to provide correct information to the largest possible audience.

Flakeloaf 07:37, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Response by KelvSYC

I have to contest the decision, as I believe that it introduces systematic bias towards in-game text, to the exclusion of other sources. If the shorter "nicknames" would be used, it would be contrary to guidelines that recommend the use of longer, more descriptive names. Furthermore, Dan Hibiki, under this suggestion, would be contrary to its own guidelines - it is referred to in many places that his surname is Hibiki in-game (as opposed to other characters, which are more subtle). Furthermore, I also have to note that persons who support the motion (such as User:Mr.bonus) have treated your suggestion as if it was final, while people who oppose it (such as myself) will have problems with this suggestion, as their concerns have not been addressed, and largely ignored. kelvSYC 18:54, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Response to KelvSYC by Flakeloaf

This suggestion is only that, and is by no means binding on anyone; those who think otherwise are misinformed as to what MedCab is for. Any moves or renames based on this preliminary interpretation of guidelines and policy are most definitely premature. Free advice for everyone watching would be to please wait until this discussion is closed before doing anything. The purpose of this discussion is for both sides to agree on a compromise with my help, not for me to stand on a rock and fishslap one of you until you submit.

It wasn't my intention to ignore or disrespect anyone's opinion. I interpreted the policies and guidelines as best I could in a way I thought applied to this situation. Please don't take that to mean I'm deaf to your concerns; I have no vested interest in this discussion either way. The slant towards "the other side" in my initial suggestion was due to the long shadow those guidelines seemed to cast over your argument. If I sound adversarial it's only because I can't marry your points with policy, it's not because I'm against you! Talk to me here, show me what I'm missing.

Could you please cite a guideline that prefers longer, descriptive names over clearer, more easily-understood ones? Such a guideline would contradict the ones I cited earlier (and possibly WP:NC).

My impression was based on the belief that the games are the most common source for information about these characters. Does anyone disagree with this? If so, could you demonstrate an instance where more people consulted another source to learn more about these characters than have played the games? I'm not doubting the veracity of the information provided on websites - after all, Capcom did make the game - I'm just not sure basing article titles on non-game sources would be intuitive for the audience that has only played the games. Again, we're writing for the masses here.

Is selecting for readers who've played the games over readers who've consulted the websites systemic bias or preferential treatment of a primary source (the game) over a more-thorough, equally authoritative but less-intuitive primary source (the website)? The larger question would be what are these articles about? Do they describe a character in a video game, or a character described on a website as having been in a video game?

Since the websites' job is to promote the games, I'd consider them a primary source subordinate to the games, similar to how the LucasArts video games are primary sources of Star Wars canon subordinate to the movies.

Once the article starts, all of the obscure information ever drafted on the subject becomes fair-game. The article's title... well, the summary for WP:NC said it best:

"[A]rticle naming should prefer what the majority of English speakers would most easily recognize, with a reasonable minimum of ambiguity, while at the same time making linking to those articles easy and second nature"

Ken Masters may be correct, but Ken -> a disambiguation page or Ken (Street Fighter) are arguably more easily-recognised and intuitive because of the amount of in-game exposure given to the latter over the former.

Earlier, I tried to ascribe a specific meaning to "in-game" by constraining it to mean "during gameplay" as opposed to during ending or introductory sequences. The justification behind this was that most players spend most of their time playing the game, not watching end or introductory sequences (except maybe those of us without quarters!). That's why I suggested Dan (Street Fighter) instead of Dan Hibiki. His name is stated in the game, but is it the most commonly-used way the game refers to him? I can't claim to have an encyclopedic knowledge of what's introduced where and by whom, and whose name changed to what when. Can you help me with this?

If we were to prefer full names, how would we resolve the inconsistency between characters whose last names were stated in-game, those whose weren't and those who don't have surnames at all? Should one version of the game take precedence over another? Either way, everyone will have to concede that this is going to involve an ungodly mess of redirects.

Do you have any comments on the Bison/Balrog/Vega issue? Flakeloaf 20:56, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Bison/Balrog/Vega is a non-issue to me, as are the need for disambiguation pages. But here are a couple of points:

• WP:NC(P) favors more specific names so that disambiguation is unnecessary - many fighting game characters are named Jack, Joe, and John, or varations therein. Most have surnames that can only be obtained from out-of-game info like attract mode, marquees, flyers, manuals, and so on.
• There's also something to be said from WP:NC(CN) - it can be interpreted from any position. You could say that by CN, you put the most commonly-occuring name - but then this loses precision (Does "Jin" refer to Jin Kazama, Jin Saotome, Jin Chonshu, Jin Chonrei, or someone completely different?). On the other side, doing so would be "overdoing it", as it can lead to confusion ("Lee" may refer to the character from SF1, Lee Chaolan, Lee Pai Long, Lee Rekka, Li Xiangfei, Yun Lee, Yang Lee, Chun-Li, May Lee Jinju, or something similar). In particular, at the bottom of WP:NC(CN) we have it that some articles are named by less-than-common terms out of necessity (Some of these exceptions follow from guidelines that give recommendations for enhanced precision, cleaner disambiguation and/or solution of naming conflicts, which might lead to article names that are rather "the most obvious" than strictly spoken "the most used". For example: Roger Andrew Taylor and Roger Meddows-Taylor while Roger Taylor (drummer) could indicate either of these two Roger Taylors.).
• WP:NAMEPEOPLE favors common names, but also those which are unambiguous. In particular, don't use a separate first name (even if unambiguous) for the page name of a content page, if the last name is known and fairly often used. Again, this can have any number of interpretations. Ken Masters is particularly well-used in American versions of SF, but is largely unknown to Japanese users outside of SF-derived works, such as manga, comics, anime, and so on.
• Also to be noted from WP:NAMEPEOPLE: try to avoid this type of disambiguation where possible

It doesn't solve the issue, but hope it helps. kelvSYC 22:36, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Could this confusion not be solved by parenthetical disambiguation? In your Ken example it would also be more inclusive of Japanese fans to refer to him by his given name alone and disambiguate with parentheses. You raise a good point with the need for "enhanced precision and cleaner disambiguation". Within the context of Street Fighter articles there is no confusion because there are no names that are repeated. The closest we get is variants of Ryu (all merged with Ryu's article), and name confusion as with Juli/Juni. As soon as you step outside of Street Fighter though, all hell breaks loose - I really like your Lee example as proof of that. Parenthetical disambiguation solves this problem but it also introduces a bigger one: Street Fighter's one of only two series of fighting games I can think of (the other being Soul Calibur) where characters' full names are not used with enough frequency during the game to drive them into the players' heads. Fixing the "first names only" standard here would break other standards elsewhere. If I really wanted to stir the pot from the "Full names" side of the fence, I'd suggest redirecting Jin (MvC) to Jin (Cyberbots) :).

All seriousess aside, I completely see your point. Something tells me this situation isn't what WP:NAME had in mind. If there were a more ideal case for an individualised style guide to solve this very problem I haven't seen it.

The direction against using lone first names is probably meant to keep people from moving Dikembe Mutombo to Dikembe because he is the only notable person with that name, while at the same time sparing us the overly-specific Dikembe Mutombo Mpolondo Mukamba Jean-Jacques Wamutombo (presumably to keep us from tripping over Dikembe Mutombo Mpolondo Mukamba Jean-Jacques Jingleheimer Schmidt by accident). I can't think of any SF characters off the top of my head who have surnames and unambiguous given names.

WP:NAMEPEOPLE's direction against "this type of disambiguation" refers to overly-specific parenthetical notes such as (guitarist) instead of (musician), since musician is the more intuitive term.

So what is "intuitive"? For someone who went to an arcade exactly once, played a round of Street Fighter and wanted to learn more about Ken's haircut, Ken (Street Fighter) would suffice. For someone aware of other fighting games, the need for greater clarity in names would become evident very quickly ("'Jin' who?!"). I see both sides here. What do you two think? Flakeloaf 23:41, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

It still doesn't solve the issue of "E. Honda" vs. "Edmond Honda" (and some sources have Edmund Honda), which is what all this is about, but for a significant portion (possibly the majority) of notable fighting games full names are preferred over short names and a quagmire of parenthetical disambiguation, which is what you get from in-game sources alone, which is what I want to point out. Having said that, I argue that SF and SC should follow suit with this portion for consistency, even though there are no such cases where two names are confused for each other (Yun and Yang are brothers, Gill and Urien are brothers, Ken and Guile are brothers-in-law, Ken and Ryu are "brothers", Charlie and Guile are "brothers", Cody and Guy are "brothers", etc.) - so it really should be Sakura Kasugano, Karin Kanzuki, etc. - whenever a surname is available, it should be included as the name of the article about the subject. I do prefer "Edmond Honda" over "E. Honda" for two reasons: one is consistency, and the other is that it is the canonical given name, as stated in the bio, manuals, etc.

Also to be noted is "R. Mika" vs "Rainbow Mika" vs "Mika Nanakawa" - name as given in-game, full ring name, or real name. One candidate could be removed if we can resolve Blue Mary vs Mary Ryan (name given in-game vs full name). kelvSYC 00:39, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

• • The whole point of this debate was to use the most common names as the article titles. I don't understand your problem. E. Honda is his most common name. You said that "it is the canonical given name, as stated in the bio, manuals, etc" - yes, but it's not the name he is given in the games he appears in. That is the whole point - the article should not be named after a name less people are familiar with. Just read everyone of mine and the mediators points - surnames on SF & Soul Calibur characters are extra information that 95% of Wiki users will not even know exist. A good example is Nathaniel "Rock" Williams - When I first went to his page I thought that I had been linked to the wrong page as I'd never heard that name (I never looked at Soul Calibur character bios) - if the page was just called Rock (Soul Edge) (as it is now) then every single person even slightly familiar with the game would instantly recognise the character/article. There is no mistaking Sakura (Street Fighter) as it clearly states that you are looking at the page of Sakura from Street Fighter. But to a fan of the series unfamliar with the last names, Sakura Kusagano could be anyone. Until either looking at the image (if there is one) or reading further into the article that you find out that Sakura Kusagano is Sakura from Street Fighter's last name. Not everyone who loves Street Fighter follows the story you know. I for one am the biggest SF fan imaginable - I have played the game almost non-stop from 1991 and still play the original series to this day and I also consider myself to be very good at the game - but I have never been interested in the character's biographies. That is why it should be the common name as the title. And your last point is the same as your first - common name=ring name - Blue Mary. Although R. Mika is a bit more difficult as she only appears in one game where Rainbow Mika is used almost as much as R. Mika. I think it should be moved to R. Mika for consistancy as that is the name given to her on the player select and below her vital bar. Obviously - as with all articles - the full name will redirect. Mr.bonus 10:27, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
    • Oh yeah, even my mum knows who E. Honda is but she didn't know that 'E' stood for Edmond. Shows how E. Honda is far more common.

Why would the canonical name be "not the name given in the games they appear in"? That makes no sense. Also consider that similar precedents to what I support have been put through in other areas: for example, Lenny Leonard is a character from The Simpsons who is mostly referred to by a single name (Lenny) for much of the series run, as was Carl and, to a lesser extent, Moe. Raimundo Pedrosa is listed there, despite the fact that his surname has only been mentioned as a throwaway line on Xiaolin Showdown (although Kimiko's surname appears more often and Clay's surname is featured prominently). Just as the fact that not everyone who plays Street Fighter is familiar to the full names of all the characters, not everyone who watches The Simpsons is aware of the full names of all the characters (I also have to note that the TV Wikiproject is also inconsistent to this regard, and I expect WPs on other fictional characters from other sources, even quasi-fictional characters like those from professional wrestling, have similar issues). As to the "extra information that 95% of Wiki users will not even know exist", that's not a valid argument - arguably 95% of Wiki users can't tell Canadian football and American football apart, or know what a Riemannian manifold or the fundamental theorem of finite abelian groups is - Wikipedia is here to inform, after all. What goes on in the series' canon is just as important as the name that is used for much of the game, and the article title should reflect that. kelvSYC 07:40, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Second Suggestion

Why would the canonical name be "not the name given in the games they appear in"? That makes no sense.

I have to disagree here. Capcom owns these characters and can create any backstory for them they like. The games are ideally the first source of information but the website is the most recent source, which makes it more authoritative. If someone at capcom.co.jp wakes up tomrorow, retcons Ryu's birthplace to Kiev & writes that Ryu stands for Really Young Ukranian, that'll be his name. It would definitely enhance the recognition problems that Mika Nanakawa causes now, but we'll jump off that bridge when we get to it. My earlier comment about the website being a subordinate source of canon to the games was in error and, like most analogies, it was a really bad one. Since when does an old source of information take precedence over a more-recent one? I still insist the games are the primary way people learn about these characters, but for me to to call them the supreme source of information over another authoritative source whose contradictions of the games is clearly intended to be canon is just silly.

Also consider that similar precedents to what I support have been put through in other areas: for example, Lenny Leonard is a character from The Simpsons who is mostly referred to by a single name (Lenny) for much of the series run, as was Carl and, to a lesser extent, Moe.

To expand, Lenny leads to a disambiguation and Lenny (The Simpsons) uses a parenthetical disambiguation. Lenny Leonard marries the need to give articles intuitive titles (which "Lenny Leonard", admittedly, is not) and the need to give unique titles while going easy on the parenthetical disambiguations. More importantly, the title also follows the convention set by Bart Simpson instead of Bart (The Simpsons). Bartholemew Jo-Jo Simpson leans too far over the line between clarity and commonality to make sense. We can't have one standard for A-list characters and another for secondary ones; that's what List of Minor Characters in $Main_Article is for.

What goes on in the series' canon is just as important as the name that is used for much of the game, and the article title should reflect that

I agree, to the extent that article titles also need to balance readability, appropriateness to the largest possible audience and clarity with respect to other articles that could have similar names (even if they don't). Who is Nathaniel Williams?

Then again, who is Dwayne Johnson? Rock (disambiguation) adds an extra step but anyone, wrestling fan or video gamer, who types "Rock" into the Wikpedia search box and hits go deserves a geology lesson whether they want one or not. We have to assume that the average Wikipedia reader might not know everything about their search term (why else would they be here?) but we also have to give them credit for knowing that Wikipedia is a compendium of all kinds of knowledge, not just a collection of video game cruft. Rose and Sakura are flowers, guile is a trait and Lee's disambiguation page is longer than my tax return. If someone's willing to type their own parenthetical disambiguation in the search box then they already know what they're looking for, so a simple redirect to the correct name seems like a "good enough" solution from that point. Likewise, if the "most common" name is going to lead them to a disambiguation page anyway, why lead them from one type of disambiguation (a list of possible name matches) to another (a semi-adequate article name with parentheses)?

Wikipedia is here to inform, after all

Yes, but that's what the article content is for. Shouldn't the article name remain accessible to all?

Blue Mary vs Mary Ryan

Damn you, I was really hoping that wouldn't come up here Thank you, I had forgotten about that one. The correct answer there would be Mary Ryan (Fatal Fury) but only to conform with the binomial-names convention all of the other characters follow. In that one instance the article title would be the exception to the rule and would be dear-god-no-stop-that-wrong if taken by itself, but the exception would be necessary in order to accommodate a wider, more sensible standard. If the binomial name convention were followed here, Rainbow Mika, R. Mika and R. Mika (Street Fighter) would all hard-redirect to Mika Nanakawa.

In all honesty, and this is personal opinion talking here, I'm not a big fan of parenthetical disambiguation. It has its place when dealing with people or products with identical names and no other way to differentiate them, but I think it's being overused in favour of redirects and more-correct, less-ambiguous names. I suggested it earlier because I didn't see the need to deviate from policy and create redirects from the names "we all" know, (sorry kelvSYC, but the characters' in-game given/nicknames are the most intuitive) but if an option that is both more-correct and less-reliant on unnecessary disambiguation exists I think we should consider it. Both Mary Ryan (Fatal Fury) and Blue Mary would be the exception that broke the rule created for a group of exceptions that broke a bigger rule. If it's going to pee in the pool either way, we'd may as well bite the bullet and make her article's title match the convention all of the other articles in that genre follow. Even policies have a built-in kludge factor for exigent situations.

There is no mistaking Sakura (Street Fighter) as it clearly states that you are looking at the page of Sakura from Street Fighter. But to a fan of the series unfamliar with the last names, Sakura Kusagano could be anyone. Until either looking at the image (if there is one) or reading further into the article that you find out that Sakura Kusagano is Sakura from Street Fighter's last name.

With respect, is that really a concern? "Further into the article" is the first line: "Sakura Kasugano (春日野さくら , Kasugano Sakura) is a video game character in the Street Fighter series of fighting games.", and the top of that article's infobox sports a five-inch full-colour drawing of the character. Even a cursory glance at the article leaves no ambiguity as to who the subject is. Links to that page outside the context of SF could be piped; there shouldn't be so many as to make propagating that change inconvenient.

The lead-in to WP:NAME, which is an official Policy, states "It is important to note that these are conventions, not rules carved in stone. As Wikipedia grows and changes, some conventions that once made sense may become outdated, and there may be cases where a particular convention is "obviously" inappropriate. But when in doubt, follow convention.". After hearing this discussion I'm starting to think that this situation is one where using the most-common name may be inappropriate with a view to all of the circumstances.

No one answer is going to satisfy all of the policies and guidelines, because in this case they appear to contradict one another. The need for an easily-accessible name is extremely important but is starting to look less and less realistic the more we discuss it. If we are going to have to disambiguate half of these entries anyway, why not set a single standard and have every name adhere to it?

With that in mind, here's a second suggestion:

Suggestion #2:

1. All editors congratulate yadda yadda, we're wonderful, get on with it;
2. Editors acknowledge that the common (in-game) names for Street Fighter characters are the most recognisable, however:

• These recognisable names conflict with the names of other people and things;
• Parenthetical disambiguation is an inelegant solution that does not completely solve the problem, as some SF characters have appeared in other media not connected to this series;
• By not referring to its characters by their binomial names, The SF series is in the minority and continuing to do so would almost certainly conflict with both the rest of the relevant Wikiproject and the conventions set by other articles describing fictional characters who have binomial names;
• Some characters in fighting games are already known by their binomial names. Referring to them by a single name and a parenthetical disambiguation is counter-intuitive and would be extremely difficult to propagate across this shard of the Wikiproject, to say nothing about the entire project itself;
• Canon binomial names for most SF characters exist and are in common usage across the game's fandom;
• WP:NAME allows for flexibility when the requirement to provide the most common name is at odds with a number of rational reasons not to; and
• WP:NAMEPEOPLE and WP:NC(CN) are not Policy;
  

3. In light of 2, the articles referring to Street Fighter characters should be titled with the correct binomial names of those characters according to canon set by, in order of precedence, Capcom's Japanese website, the English translation for same, and Street Fighter arcade titles (excluding the EX series) in descending order of release;

3b. The English Wikipedia Policy on placing the given name before the family name shall prevail in any case;

3c. Characters without binomial names may retain their single-named articles with parenthetical disambiguation only where absolutely necessary (as with Balrog (Street Fighter), but Blanka and not Blanka (Street Fighter));

4. "Common names" of SF characters should redirect to the binomial names. Entries on any disambiguation pages should be of the form: "Dan Hibiki, a character in the Street Fighter series of video games";

5. All articles referring to Street Fighter characters should start off with the character's full name including kana and a statement placing them in the SF series, and should bear a colour drawing, screenshot or sketch of the character, following the example in Sakura Kasugano

5b. Characters who did not appear first in a SF title should be described by the game in which they did first appear with a note elsewhere describing their role in any SF sequels, following the example in Jin Saotome;

6. On the English Wikipedia, Vega, Balrog and M. Bison refer to the bullfighter, the boxer and the leader of Shadaloo, respectively, even in versions of SF games that were released only in Japan. Mentions of these three characters in each other's articles should be wikified, and disambiguation pages should specify whether they refer to the Japanese or World versions of these characters. Each character's article should mention the name change;

6b. Although the M in M. Bison initially stood for Mike (since the boxer was inspired by a real-life person and soundalike names for characters so inspired are not uncommon in Asia), the first name lost its meaning once the leader of Shadaloo inherited it. In the absence of future canon to the contrary, the character's full, correct name is "M. Bison". He does not break the convention against initials because the initial with the period is his name (see Harry S. Truman);

6c. Bison should mention Bison (disambiguation), which should in turn suggest GNU Bison, M. Bison and Balrog (Street Fighter); and

7. The initial suggestion that WP:Computer & video games should adopt a manual of style standardising the naming convention one way or the other is still a really, REALLY, REALLY good idea.

It's a near-complete flipflop from the first suggestion, but since I don't officially have an opinion I get to do stuff like that :) Flakeloaf 07:51, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Response by Kung Fu Man

Just to make sure I understand this so there's no room for confusion. -The article names such Maki Genryusai, Edmond Honda and Sakura Kasugano are prefered over counterparts such as Maki (Final Fight), E. Honda and Sakura (Street Fighter) -Articles with no binomial name but aren't common names in general (like Chun-Li) use only the name. -Articles with no binomial name but are common (such as Ryu) get the Ryu (Street Fighter) treatment -M. Bison stays M. Bison because the M stands for nothing really in the US stuff. If so this sounds fine and dandy to me, and if nobody else disagrees...boy is there a lot of what Mr. bonus did to go around and undo...--Kung Fu Man 03:18, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

That's pretty much it, yeah: This latest suggestion proposes that as much of the whole name as we have should be used. On its face it looks like a double-standard (why does Ryu (Street Fighter) get a paren when Ken Masters doesn't?) but whatever standard you settle on will have exceptions like that. The bigger picture here shows us a number of other video game characters who do have family names; preferring Cage (Mortal Kombat) and Ukyo (Samurai Showdown) (or was that Samurai Spirits?) would be unworkable. We'll still have the redirects from the parenthetical versions of the article names to address the [very valid] accessibility issue.

Mr.bonus did put in a lot of good work to improve this shard and that's commendable. It might not agree with what the WikiProject agrees the standard should be (if you've already reached a consensus) but at least he propagated a consistent standard. Flakeloaf 04:18, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

• I could honestly go either way on the issue, which is why I haven't made a big deal out of it. The only real problem I have is with the lack of a standard. Even if Cloud Strife is listed in the manual as such, that is not the name he is commonly known as. If you ask me which I prefer, I'd say the full name, though. JuJube 03:24, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

And that's just it. It avoids the disambig from Cloud and the discussion over whether Cloud (Video game character), Cloud (Final Fantasy) or Cloud (Final Fantasy 7) should prevail, at least until some fool changes his name to Cloud Strife and does something noteable. Incidentally, if this WikiProject elects in favour of parenthetical disambiguations, the current guidelines suggest that (Video game character) should be considered, in keeping with the tendency towards the most-general notes inside parentheses (hence (Musician) instead of (Drummer)). Flakeloaf 04:18, 30 January 2007 (UTC)