Recent changes Random page
GAMING
Gaming
 
WoWWiki
Halopedia
FFXIclopedia
 Age of Conan
Warhammer Online
Grand Theft Wiki
See more...

Dothack Wiki:Community Portal

From .hack//Wiki

Jump to: navigation, search
 

Make sure to look here from time to time for important discussions and clarifications about various elements of the Wiki.

Contents

[edit] Articles we need to work on

[edit] Project .hack

  • Harald Hoerwick (This is one of the most important characters in the universe, y'know...)

[edit] Games

We're almost done. We really should focus more on the GU articles, so let's try to finish these off.

[edit] Legend of the Twilight

[edit] SIGN Episode Summaries

We're almost done with these. I don't own the first DVD, so I can't do it... y'know, unless I buy it, but I'd rather someone else who does own it work on these pages.--OtakuD50 06:29, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

I can handle this easily if needed; I have the first DVD. ~EmiHinata(April 6, 2007)

No one's stopping you.--OtakuD50 02:00, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Current Discussions

[edit] Relationships

Seems like a useful section. Read up on it for Atoli's and Haseo's. It would help make the articles more complete and explain the character's relationship with others. What do you guys think? Kulaguy 03:41, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

I really don't think it's such a good idea, since it would pretty much all be speculation. Any of the important relationships would probably already be mentioned within the articles anyways, so I don't see the point in making up a new section. --Twilight Duality 11:42, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
I agree with Twilight Duality. If it can't be worked into the article, and it isn't "special enough" to somehow warrant its own section, I don't think we need it... - Kuukai2 06:41, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Tense

What tense should we be using? I feel we should use present, yet past tenses seem to come up every now and again. Kulaguy 07:14, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

I would say past tense, given .hack's sliding time-scale. AuraTwilight 17:48, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, I think this is a good reason why. - Kuukai2 06:39, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

[edit] What are these?

I remember downloading these pics from ALTIMIT Corp a long time ago and I'm just getting around to uploading them. Anyone know what the pics are of? Looks like Lost Grounds, but I don't know which. It could also just be pictures of normal areas. Kulaguy 04:52, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Pic1 is a colored version of a picture on the Lost Grounds page of the Perfect Guidebook. There is no explanatory text to go with it, so I can't say anything more. Pic2 is new to me, though I get the feeling it ought to be familiar somehow. Pic3 looks to be Wailing Capital Wald Uberlisterin. --Shinsou Wotan 06:12, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
Kind of look like concept art to me. I have no idea what the first one is, but the second one could be an early design for what would later become Coite-Bodher Battlefield or possibly even the area where you battle Ovan at Backtop City Megin Fi. The third one could be a draft of the castle at Wailing Capital Wald Uberlisterin. --Twilight Duality 11:49, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
I'm surprised to be the first one to point out that Pic 2 is Forest of Pain at a slightly different angle than in the Perfect Guidebook. The lava in 1 makes me think Sugar Mansion Sif Berg, but that's a completely different building... - Kuukai2 05:54, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Introduced Characters

We need a definite policy on this because I personally think it's stupid to say that Kite was introduced in LINK or that Tabby was introduced in Redemption.--OtakuD50 07:39, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

I agree. I still think that "introduced characters" and "first appearances" should have a one-to-one correspondence. That is, if someone's "first appearance" is in a given series, then the one and only place they're "introduced" is that series. Last time I brought that up (see below) no one bit, and the policy stayed as "one first appearance, many introductions." - Kuukai2 15:10, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
Oh my God. You guys are too bitchy about this crap. "Introduced" was the best word I could come up at the time. All it means is that it is the first time THAT character is being shown in that particular series. It mostly just applies to multi-part things like the games or novels, not a manga like LINK. Do you get it? Yes, we already fucking know who Tabby is, but now she's finally being "introduced" per se, or shown, in the GU Games series in Redemption. Take the Smash Bros series for example. Every Nintendo fan knows who Ganondorf is, but he's still being "introduced" in Melee because he wasn't in the original. Does it really bother you that much that I used the word "introduced" because I couldn't think of a better one? Do you need me to explain it more? Just go find a fucking better word for it if you don't like it, and quit bitching.
Oh, and to finish off that stupid first appearances debate, the reason why we go by the release timeline rather than the story timeline is that it makes more sense. Everybody found out about Alkaid through the Games, right? You agree with that? Good. But, oh wait, Alcor came before it. Do we switch the first appearance to Alcor? Fuck no. Chances are that most people discovered Alkaid through the GU Games, not Alcor. Heck, I can guarantee newer fans first saw Alkaid in the Games, not some random obscure manga called Alcor that you can only read by downloading scanlations?
Do you guys get it now? Geez, I'm tired of this damn thing. Kulaguy 00:36, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
Learn to chill, Kulaguy. Goddamn, you're the one being too bitchy about it. I'm pretty sure most people knew the deal with the first appearances thing, and the Introduced thing just needed a bit more explanation. And WTF was with deleting what I typed up in the unrelated "Same character, different article" discussion, Kula?--OtakuD50 01:34, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
I dunno. I just typed my bitching. I wasn't paying attention to whether or not someone else had edited the page already. I think I just pressed the revision on Kuukai's edit and didn't notice you made another one. Kulaguy 02:08, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
That makes a lot more sense than what everyone thought it meant. Consequentially, some of the pages definitely need to be changed now...
I don't think anyone is challenging the "our world vs. their world" thing. We just don't think including advertisements makes sense. - Kuukai2 04:18, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Same Character, Multiple Articles: When Do We Do it?

I'd say when the PC is different enough from its older character that the similarity between them isn't immediately apparent. Hence why Silver Knight's R:1 and R:2 characters are on the same page, but Rena and Brigit have separate pages. I realize that Piros and Natsume are notable exceptions to this rule, but as they're both party members I'd say it's ok to let them keep their own pages. --CRtwenty 18:25, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Isn't W.B. Yeats not immediately recognizable as Hokuto? - Kuukai2 08:13, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
I'd say that we merge minor characters if they're in G.U. because they really have little to do with the plot.--Cubia X 09:46, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
Yeats is an R:1 character too. We're missing a criterion or two if we want to put a consistent policy into writing... I'm not actually sure it's possible to put into writing a rule that covers the way we're set up right now. - Kuukai2 07:12, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Hmm, this is a toughie... It seems that the same character playing the same role in multiple parallel storylines would have the same article and the differences would be explained (all of the G.U. characters with GUPlus and the novels). However, the same character from Project .hack making an appearance in GU would warrant a new article (Natsume, Piros) unless their role isn't much more than a cameo (Silver Knight, NOVA). Then again, there's Aura and Balmung, who have significant roles in multiple Project .hack series and only have the one article.

I've come to the conclusion that, when a character appears in a series other than the one they were introduced (or most prominently featured) in, but within the same Project, there shouldn't be a new article, period. If the same character appears in different projects, they will be treated the same as same player, different character. If a player has separate characters and the two are significantly different enough (Brigit/Rena, Wiseman/Yata/Nala/Naobi, the Machas) they get to have separate articles. If they aren't significantly different enough or if one (or all) appearances are basically just cameos or bit parts (Silver Knight, Kaochin), or if they aren't exactly characters (the Phases), then they shouldn't have separate articles. In the case of parallel/alternate storylines, we're probably going with the policy that the different incarnations are treated as the same character, but I'm willing to go with separate articles if it's better that way. In the case of LINK, it's part of the GU project (.hack Conglomerate) despite it not taking place in the same timeline (I'm considering it the LotT of G.U. in that respect). According to the roles I suggest above, Haseo appearing in LINK probably won't warrant a new article (the same as Balmung in LotT didn't, despite him having a completely different personality and role), but Kite in LINK would warrant a new article (since it's his first appearance in the G.U. world; Azure Kite is a completely different being altogether), and so would Tsukasa if his role is significant enough (and I think it will be). Or instead of dividing by Projects we could go with World eras (R1, R2, RX) and it wouldn't be that different. What do you guys think?--OtakuD50 01:35, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, well, I think era would work best, of the two. I'm not sure if he would apply it to this, but generally I agree with Kula's stance that less merging is better than more merging. I actually believe strongly that the Phases and Avatars should have different pages, but that's not really within the scope of this discussion. Though really, I don't really think they should be treated as characters any more than the monsters or the Guardian, unless they take the form of a character (Mia, Macha, Cubia)... I also don't actually see the point in keeping even Ginkan on one page, but maybe that's just me. A rule of thumb would be "every character infobox gets a page." It's straightforward to follow, and doesn't clutter up pages. If you have two characters from different The Worlds, they're on different pages. If you have two characters of the same era, split them up when they're both credited characters (e.g. Yata and Naobi), or put them in the same infobox otherwise. Or something, I dunno. - Kuukai2 04:25, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Verb Tense

I noticed a change made yesterday to a verb tense. Someone changed "is PKKed by Haseo" to "was PKKed by Haseo" and left the rest of the article the same -.-. Technically, when referring to a written work the present tense is correct, and a historical event would be past tense. I'm guessing (judging from most of the site) written work is the tense usage we're going for? (Sorry, my mom's an English teacher so I had grammar boiled into my brain as soon as I could speak).--TristanLight 07:54, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

I haven't really been paying attention to which tense we've been using. I just write whatever sounds right. >_> Kulaguy 17:10, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mission Areas

Is there any way to integrate the Mission areas found in the Games Characters Trivia sections? It just seems really awkward. Kulaguy 03:14, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

By "integrate", do you mean moving into the main article, or what? - Kuukai2 03:16, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
Well, I mean somehow put it in the article so it doesn't look odd. Right now, it is a subsection in the Trivia section. Heck, you could look at it now and see my point. Moving it to the main article might work but BlackRose's would take a while. 03:40, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
Wow. I think there's about as much text in that section as in her entire games summary. I think it can be worked in, though, I'll try in a bit... - Kuukai2 04:23, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
Actually, I'd like to eventually have separate pages for each area you visit in the games. Do you think that'd be a good idea? --CRtwenty 04:36, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
Well, that would work perfectly with integrating them into the articles, just like Lost Grounds and stuff. But really, we've talked about this before, and I'm not sure we want one page for every area. Most of them aren't really noteworthy at all. Maybe a list page or something? We can use tables and add pictures when relevant, like for the Harald rooms. - Kuukai2 04:59, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
Then I take it you wish for a 'timeline' of what happens in the games? (eg order of things that Kite does, emails, news, BBS, etc) Ruthborn 23:10, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Section tag

So, yeah, I'm thinking of making a tag that we put for articles that are pretty much done, except that it's missing a few sections. Any ideas what the quote should be? Oh and read the Haseo pics discussion too. Kulaguy 23:08, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

I have no specific ideas, but how about a quote that mentions somethign being "imcomplete". I'm sure I've heard lines like that several times throughout the series. Rpg 02:35, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] We have too many Haseo pics

How should we deal with it? I don't wanna delete them since most are very good, but if we add them to the Haseo page, it'd just clutter it up more than it already is. Heck, this discussion could also move into other Characters who have lots of good pics but not enough room. Kulaguy 18:48, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

I guess the same goes for the Aura page? I'll admit I've added more images than the page looks like it can handle, but I can't help but add something if I feel it's relevant. In the cases of these pages that have a lot of pictures, could we simply put them in a gallery at the bottom of the page like we have for some other pages? Rpg 02:35, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
Well, realize that we have massive redundancy. We have 3 different pictures of just Haseo's 3rd form against a white background. Cool poses, but still, if someone uploads another one there simply isn't anywhere to put it. - Kuukai2 07:13, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
If we get too many we could always put them in a gallery at the bottom. The Haseo page looks fine to me though, picture wise. --CRtwenty 16:45, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Weapons/Armor/Items/Other things I'm forgetting

Holy shit. I didn't realize how unorganized these lists are. A separate page for modifications, another page for R:2 items, another for R:2 armor, another for spells. Damn, I'm gonna need to fix these. It'll take a while though. Kulaguy 22:11, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Um, give me a strategy of what to change and I'll be happy to help. I too am sure something's broken, just not sure how to fix it. That's why the vague term "items project" is on my todo list. - Kuukai2 18:22, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Game Rare Weapons

CRTwenty and I are having trouble deciding whether to keep Rare Weapon locations on the pages or not. I want them on, he does not. As the original admin I would appreciate a view from you please. Use List of Twin Blade Weapons and List of Long Arm Weapons as references. Thank you.Ruthborn

Personally, I see no reason why we need to put the Rare Weapon locations on there. Why put it for the Rare Weapons only? Why not the other weapons too? Really, the list of weapons pages is pretty much just a list of weapons. Nothing more. We don't need to put locations on there. We're not a FAQ. We're a Wiki. Kulaguy 04:15, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

I think we should keep it,if you guys are having trouble finding the location of the weapons I'll help.--Kite X 04:40, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Kite, you idiot, we know where to find the Rare Weapons. Ruthborn was just saying he thought we should list it and, like Kula, I believe we shouldn't list them, this isn't an FAQ.--Ellimist 06:42, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
...fine. So what information are we going to put on this site and what information are we going to withhold?
It's not withholding... it's just we never intended for this site to be a walkthrough. --CRtwenty 03:07, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
I can see there being a "found at" part in the weapon table template, as well as maybe an image part. It's semi-faq-ish, but then again so is the stat info, really. Tabby's paws are way too high level for her, and Haseo's weapons are all to dang weak when he's the Terror of Death. The stats are really an in-game thing, just like the places they're found. I don't really see a reason not to put both as long as someone commits to adding all of them. - Kuukai2 05:10, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
I think there is a fundamental difference between adding the statistics of weapons and adding the location where they are found. Perhaps the best way to spefically designate this is whether or not the information is applicable to more than one media. For example: whether it's The World in the games, the manga, or the anime, the statistics for the various weapons will remain standard. However, the location where you find a weapon in the .hack games is not necessarily (and perhaps necessarily not) the only place that you can find the weapon in an actual incarnation of The World. I'm sure that you can find them in more than one place, but for the sake of brevity and to hold a linear storyline, this was not expressed in the games (which, I feel, is rightfully so). If you need any further explanation of what the hell I'm talking about, feel free to say so. Otherwise: thoughts?. --Rintaun 04:10, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
Umm, like I just said above, stats are not consistent between the anime and game by any measure. Tabby's Paws, Nekotama, are level 116 in the games and clearly not in Roots. - Kuukai2 04:57, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, the games aren't a very good depection of the real way the game works. For instance Haseo can be seen in wasteland, forest, and other kinds of fields in the anime. But do we ever see these in the game? No. And what about Kuhn? He's shown in Roots as a powerful and experienced player. Yet he joins your party in Rebirth at level 10 or so. Same thing with Bordeaux and Matsu, you fight them at level 25 and 30, yet storyline wise they should be much more powerful then that. Game statistics =/= Storyline statistics. --CRtwenty 06:59, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
Good point. Then! I propose we either add *all* of the game information, making us the BESTEST FAQ IN ALLLLLLLL THE LAND~!(tm) or we remove it. We need to be consistent one way or another. --Rintaun 07:17, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
I don't see how it would kill us to add locations. - Kuukai2 21:25, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
Because then people would want information on other things in the game. Until we'd eventually wind up having to write walkthroughs and FAQs. --CRtwenty 22:41, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
Aside from strategy, we seem to be planning on pretty much putting everything in anyway. And this is different than some guy wanting us to add something. This is a case where Ruthborn and/or I just want pemission to add something, for completeness. - Kuukai2 23:07, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Okay let's start the indenting over. It's getting slightly ridiculous :P Anyway, to be entirely honest, I don't have a problem with someone adding this information if they're willing to take the time to do so. Hell, if someone can write a walkthrough / strategy guide professionally enough (and encyclopedically enough), then I don't have a problem with them adding that. Requesting these things, it I think, entirely different though. Hate as you will. --Rintaun 06:50, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

I fail to see how knowing what field a rare item can be found in will help somebody understand the .hack series. It's the type of information that belongs in a walkthrough, which we don't have here. If you plan on putting that information in, plan on putting in an entire walkthrough with it. --CRtwenty 07:31, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
To reiterate: I don't mind not having the information, either. But I think we've already stepped in that puddle (read: ocean) by adding stats. Either remove them or don't care about adding other things. --Rintaun 07:48, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
I'll admit, we've dipped our hands in walkthrough territory a few times. With the Grunty Raising methods, and the item stats, and I agree that if we handled it properly we could add the locations... but just having a big block of text showing the location of those items at the end of a giant table doesn't seem like a very attractive way to do it. --CRtwenty 08:00, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
I can honestly say that I agree entirely with that. Thus the question is not "Can we do this?", but rather "How do we do this properly?".... Yea, I have no clue either. You guys decide. XD --Rintaun 09:40, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
Smaller font, bigger table? - Kuukai2 18:43, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
Originally the rare weapon locations were listed first, before the table. You should remember since you're the one who edited it CR (see Long Arm Weapon List). How about this then: We make one page devoted to Rare Items which includes all items, weapons and upgrades found in the games, anime and manga. Perhaps we could add information about the 'Rare Hunter' job as well. As for the purpose of having weapons listed at all. I figure someone will eventually want (or request) a list anyway. The lists were never soley around the game weapons to begin with. Ruthborn 11:03, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
I think they should just be part of the dang table, shouldn't be that hard. Even non-rare weapons come from somewhere... - Kuukai2 01:32, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
From my understanding, most rare weapons in the game come from fields that are hinted at in other sources. Perhaps in the trivia of such sources, it could be noted that this field is mentioned, and then either an article about that field and what makes it special, or just a mentioned of it in the trivia. --Gryffon 19:31, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
Some are just found in certain kinds of areas, and we'd want to list an example keyword. I think this was done to sell guidebooks. - Kuukai2 21:40, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Source

We need to start putting sources on image files. I can't do it by myself so here are the ones I can tell you guys to put sources in.

And, well, if you know the source, put it on there. If you don't know, leave it alone. If you're not sure, post on the talk page of the image file. Kulaguy 07:00, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Umm, where exactly do you add the source? I'll help with this. It's the kind of stuff I can actually do. X3 - Amaethon
Just go to the image page, and click on the "Edit" button. Then add "Source: URL" and hit Save Page. Really not that hard. Kulaguy 00:56, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
All right, thanks. I just finished the Card Battle pics. I'll work on ENEMY next. - Amaethon

We also need to start putting sources within the actual articles. With all of the conflicting information that we have from all the different medias, it's getting too confusing to use the same system that we've been using.--Twilight Duality 18:08, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] R:2 Weapons

Okay, I've gotten started on fixing up the R:2 weapons pages. Use this coding if you wanna work on it:

{| class="infobox bordered" style="text-align: center; background: #000000;" !style="background: #e6e9ff; text-align:left;" width="250px" | Name !style="background: #e6e9ff;" width="45px" | Level !style="background: #e6e9ff; text-align:left;" width="100px" | Type !style="background: #e6e9ff;" width="40px" | Rarity !style="background: #e6e9ff;" width="50px" | P-ATK !style="background: #e6e9ff;" width="50px" | M-ATK !style="background: #e6e9ff;" width="50px" | Fire !style="background: #e6e9ff;" width="50px" | Water !style="background: #e6e9ff;" width="50px" | Wind !style="background: #e6e9ff;" width="50px" | Earth !style="background: #e6e9ff;" width="50px" | Light !style="background: #e6e9ff;" width="50px" | Dark !style="background: #e6e9ff; text-align:left;" width="125px" | Abilities |- |style="background: #e6e9ff; text-align:left;" | |style="background: #e6e9ff;" | |style="background: #e6e9ff; text-align:left;" | |style="background: #e6e9ff;" | ★ |style="background: #e6e9ff;" | |style="background: #e6e9ff;" | |style="background: #e6e9ff;" | |style="background: #e6e9ff;" | |style="background: #e6e9ff;" | |style="background: #e6e9ff;" | |style="background: #e6e9ff;" | |style="background: #e6e9ff;" | |style="background: #e6e9ff;" | |}

Go to edit to see what it looks like rather than a jumbled up mess. Repeat the part between the "|-" and "|}" to add more weapon parts. Anyways, I hope this'll clean up the pages. Maybe later I can work on the R:1 weapons. Kulaguy 21:35, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

You should have mention you'd rather had it this way near the start, would have been much easier to do it then than now. But once you find the copy/paste pattern it doesn't really take TOO long to change. As for the R:1 weapons, I'll see if I can write a little scriptlet to take the current data and convert it into a nice wikitable. --Phoenix 21:44, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
Sorry. Just noticed how neat it looked this way when I checked the Weapon Mods page. And if you wanna see what the current R:1 weapon table looks like, scroll down this page until you find links to pages with it. Kulaguy 22:13, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
I still think we should add pictures and/or at least where to acquire each weapon... - Kuukai2 00:46, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
If someone ever gets pictures, you can just add a gallery. Kulaguy 03:13, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Grunty Audio

Anyone out there wanna try to get audio for the Grunty phrases? We can't have a section for catch phrases if we don't have audio! Kulaguy 05:01, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

It's easy to extract from the games, it's in raw PCM. If anyone is interested in doing that, I can elaborate. I have the Japanese version, would we want to add those? - Kuukai2 09:13, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Adopted Policies

...and related discussions...

[edit] We aren't Wikipedia

So I'm gonna be changing and moving some pages. Since we aren't Wikipedia, there's no need to follow their page title rules and such. Kulaguy 21:55, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

In other words, "List of X" becomes "X". - Kuukai2 05:23, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] English version takes precedence over Japanese version

English version names will be used in this Wiki, with the name changes (and the original name and kanji) noted in the trivia section for each character. Should different versions of a character's name be present in official translations, the Wiki will go by whichever name is used the most. Note that, regardless of quantity and acceptance elsewhere, official translations have a much higher precedence over fan translations.--OtakuD50 06:29, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Rei Idumi

We will be referring to her as "Rei Idumi" whenever necessary since that is allegedly what she requests her name to be romanized as, despite her name appearing as "Rei Izumi" in the Legend of the Twilight manga.--OtakuD50 06:29, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] First appearances

Okay, well, you know how each character has a First Appearance row? That is supposed to say the First Appearance through our timeline, not the .hack timeline. So an example would be Orca's. He may have first appeared in AI Buster in the .hack timeline but in our timeline, he first appeared in Infection. For some of the GU characters, they first appear in Resurrection not Roots. Just needed to clear that little detail up. Kulaguy 22:03, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Umm... The first like 6 episodes of Roots came out before Rebirth. If a character was introduced then, then is it Roots or Rebirth? - Kuukai2 23:33, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
Ah, but the Chainsaw Girl was shown in the trailers of Rebirth before Roots came out, so her first appearance is Rebirth. Kulaguy 23:35, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
Ok, I get your logic. - Kuukai2 23:36, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
Eh, if that one doesn't make you feel right, then think of it like this: The category is "First Appearance". I have not seen Roots, but you said she was in there as "Voice Only". That's not really an appearance. Kulaguy 23:40, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

So, the question of the hour is, should trailers count? That seems kinda unintuitive. I'm of the opinion that "First Appearance" should have a one-to-one correspondence with "Introduced Characters" on the series pages. That is, Haseo's first appearance should be Roots, and he should be "introduced" only in Roots. I dunno what anyone else thinks though. - Kuukai2 23:46, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

It's a good question. I can understand why it is the way it is though. Haseo has always been a game character first, and an anime character second. I think we should keep it asis. --CRtwenty 00:10, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
That's true, but that doesn't mean his "first appearance" can't be Roots. For all intents and purposes Balmung is a game character with a small cameo in SIGN, but that's still his first appearance. Right? - Kuukai2 09:22, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
What? The episode Balmung appeared it aired long after INFECTION was released. SIGN isn't even close to being his first appearance. --CRtwenty 05:39, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
Ack, you're right, I forgot about the overlap, since it was a lot smaller than with Roots. I guess lots of other people did, too, since I just had to change Helba and Balmung's pages. With Helba, the time difference was less than a week. Anyway, that's just a technicality. The point I'm trying to make is that "first appearance" is simply first appearance, it has nothing to do with what they're a main character in. You can be a main character in multiple things, anyway. - Kuukai2 06:42, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
Poke because we recently got feedback about the intuitiveness of the current system ^^; - Kuukai2 01:22, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Archives

http://dothack.wikia.com/index.php?title=Dothack_Wiki:Community_Portal&oldid=25146 http://dothack.wikia.com/index.php?title=Dothack_Wiki:Community_Portal&oldid=11829

Retrieved from "http://dothack.wikia.com/wiki/Dothack_Wiki:Community_Portal"
Rate this article:
Share this article: