User talk:EternalNothingnessXIII/Archive20

"The" Keyblade
I think that adding "Keyblade" after the weapon name is superficial, and that the definite article isn't needed. Isn't the simplest, most concise way of wording these sentences be in the manner of "Oathkeeper has ____ as an equipment ability" and "Guardian Soul has ____ as an equipment ability". This makes sense because the Keyblade names are considered proper nouns, so they do not use articles (in the same why, you wouldn't use a person's name and say "the" or "a" before it). Thoughts? 13:11, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I am in full agreement with you. The problem is, it's already so widespread across the Wiki in the form of the weapon articles. I personally prefer saying "Make sure you equip the Ultima Weapon" instead of "Make sure you equip Ultima Weapon," but I, too, do think that the definite article should be dropped, at least in most cases. I am tempted to use the Heartless/Nobody/Unversed/Dream Eater articles to counter your argument, but that is a whole new kettle of worms. - 13:20, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I'd say there are two instances: weapon names that are entirely a name or proper noun (e.g. Oblivion) and weapon names that consist of an adjective and noun. With the former, it's natural to use without the article because it's like using a person's name ("Oblivion has..." and "John has...). The latter should have a definite article because that's what you'd use in natural speech (e.g. the Ultima Weapon, the Guardian Soul etc.). I'd say we should use whatever sounds more natural in each case, rather than having one consistent rule. 13:32, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
 * My thoughts exactly. But now we face the challenge of changing pretty much everything to do with weapons on the Wiki to reflect this. There will probably be some arguments as to what "sounds natural" to someone, as well. - 13:40, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Well, what I can confirm is we cannot be saying the Oblivion, the Oathkeeper, or the Fenrir. Please, none of that. To be honest, it's a minor issue so I don't think it's worth going on a massive spree to change all of them. But it's just those three that are completely wrong.  14:21, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Again, I completely agree with you. At least those three are an exception to the definite article placement "rule." But look at the Organization XIII weapons. Several of them should be exceptions, too. - 14:25, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Yup, most probably. 14:27, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
 * So I guess it's just a matter of sound appeal when you get right down to it. I'm more than willing to help go through the weapon articles and remove the definite articles where appropriate later today, once my classes are done with. It'll go faster if we split the work. - 14:28, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Something just sounds wrong about leaving "the" off of Oathkeeper, especially because it's a title, like "Guardian". "The" just sounds more natural to me. also, the fact that pretty much none of the weapons in the series are singular entities -- they're all forms of a weapon, and are often forms shared between wielders. I'm not familiar enough with the rules for definite articles to point to which bylaw it's violating, but it just sounds...wrong. 14:37, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Which proves ENX's point of "There will probably be some arguments as to what "sounds natural" to someone". Put it down to a vote? 15:41, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I personally agree with both of you. At times, the direct article is not needed. But there are certainly plenty of times where it is needed, too, even if a certain weapon fits the category of "direct article not needed." If this is gonna turn into an all-out community discussion, I request that this conversation be continued in a forum (if it hasn't already) :P - 17:10, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Happy Birthday
{{KeybladeSpyMaster|time=22:37, 19 February 2015 (UTC)|happy=Happy Birthday, ENX!}

Happy Birthday ENX. 22:59, 19 February 2015 (UTC) Happy birthday friend! :) 00:17, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

About Updating/Improving Userboxes
Excellent that the template size was expanded after I created a separate page for userboxes :P I wasn't a part of Project:Music, but I do have a good grasp on when songs play in each KH game. As for renovating old templates, it's just a matter of consistency, something I try to push for in all areas of the Wiki. I think we could make all the userboxes (save for ones like "This user is male" and "This user's native language is English") look a little better since, compared to the new ones, they're an eyesore to me. We could always have a "userbox archive" of sorts to display past versions of the templates...Here's what I mean: this is the present version of the KH1 clear accomplishment userbox...

And here's a new version made by KeybladeSpyMaster, which I like better...

Basically it's the accomplishments userboxes on the main userbox page that I feel need updating. As far as the weapons userboxes, that was just a model/example description. I'm not saying we have to use it. Something from the in-game descriptions would be just fine. But we shouldn't be implying that a user is a weapon, as we do with the enemy userboxes. I feel like the character/music userboxes made by TNE, as far as updates go, such as Riku's userbox and the "Hikari -PlanitB Remix-" userbox, look just fine. It's the ones where the images are low-quality or the descriptions make no sense that I feel need fixing. - 02:04, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Kingdom of Corona misunderstanding
Hi I just noticed that their is some misunderstanding here on the edit that was reverted, all I was doing was adding in "Tangled (2010)", since many of the films on the World Template have the "title" with "(the year of the film's release)" after, I'm very confused since personally I don't see it as repetitive and going against the articles. Of course, i'm just a simple user and need to create an account, but I only am here just for small edits nothing big nothing to minuscle, I'm not trying to upset the WHOLE MAJORITY of you since you had some past troubles with some users here.--98.198.217.176 04:30, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
 * You are correct. I noticed my mistake and reverted my edit back to yours. - 04:31, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

Dark Firaga
Concerning your edit note: KHII Ultimania lists Dark Firaga among Riku-Ansem's attacks.--178.37.167.132 11:59, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Limits
The gifs are great, but will you be able to get both Limit and Final Limit pics? Also, depending on how easy it is: for my own OCD, would it be possible to get each limit with the character using their signature weapon and the extreme ring? 15:12, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Those gifs are from a YouTube video compilation (one of the few decent ones, if I understand right), so there isn't much flexibility unless we go to someone with a good recording setup for KHD.


 * ...I just remembered that we technically have a partnership with Cyberman65. -- 19:09, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

Moogle of Glory and Forteller's Keyblades
Why did you undo my edits on those pages? I was given the OK to add them. 97.81.38.40 02:03, 8 September 2015 (UTC) Rex Ronald Rilander
 * Elements of what you added were quite sloppy. Just because one says, "Yes, you can add this," it does not mean "copy/paste from a series of notes." What you wrote lacked flow and was written quite unprofessionally at times. For instance, "and/or" does NOT look good on a Wiki article. Maybe I shouldn't have all-out removed what you wrote, but please see the other Keyblade/weapon design sections and use them as a model when adding your descriptions. - 02:08, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Firstly: I know it was sloppy, I said so in the edit notes. Which is why I said to change it. Secondly: Once again, I was given the OK to "copy/paste from a series of notes.". I was told it would be welcome. Thirdly: Feel free to take my edit and smooth it out, I'm going to bed now. Oh, and before I forget: I don't want this to turn into an argument or anything, just write me your final words on the matter and let's move on. Also keep in mind I'm very tired. 97.81.38.40 02:19, 8 September 2015 (UTC) Rex Ronald Rilander
 * Firstly: it is inappropriate to add things to articles with a purposefully low quality. Secondly: one user's OK on a matter is not enough reason to do something. True, one does not need permission to add information to an article, but for something like "copy/pasting," a few other opinions should have been listed first. - 02:53, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
 * In my defense, I didn't know how low the quality of his info was nor the issue about "copy/pasting" when I told him he didn't need to ask. But still, I would like to point out that it would've been a better idea to edit the info to be more on the Wiki's standards instead of just outright removing it altogether, especially considering that section needed more details. And he himself requested in the notes to alter the content; you could've at least done him the courtesy. Blackchaos27 (talk) 04:43, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
 * If that's the game you want to play, there is no reason why you could not have fixed his edits yourself. We all have other things to do; there has been many-a-time in this Wiki's history when poorly-written edits (regardless of why they have been placed) have been removed from a page. Text should not be added to just "fill space." - 04:48, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Geez, no need to be flat out rude. The reason I didn't fix it myself is because my add ons usual get altered by someone else so I wasn't sure about the Wiki's standards. That is why I assumed an admin would just edit it to make it better. Fine I'll do it myself, but I can't right now as I'm a slow writer and I don't have the time right now, but if it makes you feel any better, I'll move it the info to the talk page and sort it out later when I have time. Fair enough? Blackchaos27 (talk) 05:48, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
 * And yet, you were being rude, yourself. A Wiki simply cannot function if all users do is "wait for the admins to do it." Do as you see fit. I'm not interested in continuing this conversation any longer. - 05:55, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Just a note to both sides, for if anything like this happens in the future -- instead of adding material that you know is not up to snuff, or deleting material that is useful but not up to snuff, please just add it in edit comments, so that others can work on your draft. 16:59, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Also (and believe me, I know I don't have a perfect track record), if you believe you have been personally attacked, please report it to a neutral staff member and then don't continue the issue with the original adversary. No hard feelings, no black marks, just advice to make things easier on everyone. 17:02, 8 September 2015 (UTC)