Talk:Vanitas

Trailer Info
Some of the Birth by Sleep Trailers Have been leaked. in one Master Xehanort Says "Those who Submit to darkness are not qualified to Wield the keyblade. already that man" Cuts to apprentice as he says this "has become a monster consumed by Darkness. use your power to defeat the darkness and correct my mistake." these trailers are on youtube. you might have to dig around a bit but it's there. should be mentioned in a article edit for link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fuoA5DL_oM0&feature=related

i wonder why xehanort actually says that when in the final mix secret ending he seems to be fighting together with his apprentice and not against him --Darksoldier 12:47, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

maybe he changed his mind or that scene happens before this one

Speculation
like what?--KHF 19:54, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

i agree with that. there should be a theorys secttion, and some of it does sound like nonsense so you should add a section nammed that too! :D. but im not in charga that so.....



I agree with NeutraVega. A theories section would defeat the purpose of the wiki being for facts. We will add information as it is given to us by the game designers, not add our ideas of what the designers might say. LapisScarab 20:52, October 23, 2009 (UTC)



I don't think it's necessary to go that far, Neutra. There's no harm in speculating, in my opinion, so long as it stays off the actual articles. I'm pretty sure Tetsuya Nomura has said that he leaves mysteries in the series to make us use our imaginations and speculate. It's just that wikias aren't the place for it. LapisScarab 02:50, October 24, 2009 (UTC)

I'd also like to bring something up; Vanitas and the other characters from Birth By Sleep are from a game that has yet to be released, meaning that a lot of these questions will be answered during the course of the game. There is no reason to speculate on the articles until the game has been released and some questions answered. Basically, a speculation section in any article about a game that has yet to be released is pointless, as the release of the game will likely render the contents of the section moot. LapisScarab 03:24, October 25, 2009 (UTC)
 * ...NeutraVega, please don't engage in denial. We put up an article based on the best information we had, backed up by multiple sites, and you raised a shit-fulled temper tantrum. Certain editors over-reacted to your calls that we report nothing at all, but the blame for the spectacle rests squarely on your shoulders.
 * Here's a hint - information translated by those of our editors who are fluent in Japanese is only unofficial, not "groundless specualtion". Glorious  CHAOS!  09:59, October 25, 2009 (UTC)

We're going the best we can. And besides, half of that speculation is made by anonymous viewers or other users who are still new here. They don't know better. Just lay off.-- Ninja Sheik  17:43, October 25, 2009 (UTC)
 * ...You complained about the name (and that only, looking at the page). Which was translated straight from the katakana, and was checked against multiple Japanese news sites.
 * Besides his name, nothing on this version of the page was unconfirmed. And that's the version of the page that we had while you were whining. And with respect to the final confirmed name, your tantrum amounted to saying we should delete all information and pictures we had just because the name ended up having a "u" shifted over one place. Wow, what a huge difference. Glorious  CHAOS!  05:29, October 26, 2009 (UTC)

Small note: If you weren't so massively in denial you would notice that I was not "dead set that I was right", and even posted a possible alternate name based on what the Japanese sites were saying. I was, however, dead set on not deleting an entire article on a character just because his name might have a "u" shifted.

But! Oh my goodness, you've just shown me the light. Of course we should delete an entire page worth of information because the initial translation was not as intended, even if was sensible. In fact, we should delete every single piece of information that hasn't been translated by it's original creators. Hell, how do we even know that the Final Mix games even exist? They haven't been released in English, so their existence must be ridiculous speculation.

Thank you so, so much, for making our fallacy clear. That's the wrap everyone! NeutraVega's explained why we should deny the existence of the Final Mix material! Glorious  CHAOS!  07:42, October 27, 2009 (UTC)


 * Well said !  TNÉ  En avant Bravo ! 13:32, October 27, 2009 (UTC)


 * Too much QQing going on... does it really matter if we speculate or not? -- Black Judgment of Guyviroth 13:42, October 27, 2009 (UTC)
 * Note to self: Never make Kryten mad.... Well, there needs to be a medium with our speculation. Too much speculation is bad for the article but having some isn't terrible. - Heart Of Oblivion 13:46, October 27, 2009 (UTC)

Ha, if you ask me, every released bit of information is bound to have speculation in its early stages. I know quite a bit of PR and journalism theory to actually say this. There's no stopping the people from speculation. But that doesn't mean that we have to be flamed for it. Which reminds me, there's another user who found that the speculation was wrong (his guess was right), but took it very gracefully.  TNÉ  En avant Bravo ! 13:46, October 27, 2009 (UTC)

i dont think ther is. just as long as u tell that its speculation...by putting it in a speculation section *cough cough* -mr.XeroXero
 * EXACTLY, but if we do put in one, we have to limit the number of speculation bits just like we did for Xion, Ven, Terra and Aqua.  TNÉ  En avant Bravo ! 14:00, October 27, 2009 (UTC)

Yes!! even if its limited i dont mind. i rly do like to read what other ppl think n stuff.

I suppose that could work so long was we regulate the speculation, but I think we should wait until after Birth By Sleep comes out. That way, more questions can be answered and the speculation section can be for the unanswered questions. It'll be more organized. LapisScarab 02:17, October 29, 2009 (UTC)
 * My thoughts exactly.  TNÉ  je t'♥ mélancolie ! 02:42, October 29, 2009 (UTC)

Hmmm... i agree. itd also keep the Speculation down i guess since more questions WILL be answered. that way it wont tic anyone off if they thunk thers "too much". -mr.xeroxero

Voice Actor
hey, judgementday, i'm not saying you're wrong, (i've definitely heard the voice before, though i'm bad at placing it...) just show us where you found out it was Miyu Irino, and it'll be settled, but unless there is a verified and checkable source, you can't leave his name on the page --Neumannz 21:06, October 21, 2009 (UTC)

ah, the voice of riku? that i think i can hear now... still, is the VA officially Mamoru Miyano? --Neumannz 21:55, October 21, 2009 (UTC)
 * It sounds like Miyano, sure, but we're not putting anything up until it's announced.  —Urutapu 22:01, October 21, 2009 (UTC)
 * and that's just fine with me --Neumannz 22:09, October 21, 2009 (UTC)

OK, I apologize. However, the reason why I kept undoing many of the changes was because when I got on, I noticed that someone had listed Miyu Irino as the VA. I assumed that was official, and so I decided to make sure that this page kept it that way.

Well, I guess this is what I get for assuming. Again, I'm sorry. User:JudgmentDay95
 * It's nothing personally against you, I was just pretty annoyed that by the time I had gotten to the page like four people had already posted Irino/Miyano.—Urutapu 23:51, October 21, 2009 (UTC)

Removed from page
"Secret video" synopses are not canon, and should be restricted to a mention in trivia or lead that "so and so appeared in this secret video". Right now, a few minutes of video barely featuring Vanitas takes up 80% of this article, which is weak.

This info should be integrated with the main BBS video page. Glorious  CHAOS!  05:48, October 22, 2009 (UTC)
 * It should also be written competently before being reinserted into article space. Glorious  CHAOS!  05:49, October 22, 2009 (UTC)

Why don't you just add/delete the video article? You don't need to remove the whole thing. Cococrash11
 * Because it's not canon, and we have no idea where it fits into the character's history. It shouldn't be on this page at all. Glorious  CHAOS!  10:05, October 29, 2009 (UTC)

What the heck are you talking about? Vanitas's orgin and first apearnce is Birth By Sleep video just like Master Xehanort. WHy don't you include video in the article? Master Xehnort, Terra,Ventus, and Aqua had one to. Cococrash11
 * The Story section is supposed to be a chronological summary of that character's plot. Consider - including the video synopsis 1) claims that it is canon, which it is not, and 2) claims that they did the video before they did their actual story. For example, the way Deep Dive was placed for Riku, it claimed he fought Roxas before going to Castle Oblivion, which is wrong.

At most, there should be a mention that "X appeared in secret video Y" in the lead or something. However, those videos ARE NOT CANON, and should only be summarized on their own article. Glorious  CHAOS!  23:54, October 29, 2009 (UTC)

Wait a second you're saying the the video isn't canon but you don't want to include in it? What the heck look at Terra,Ventus,Aqua, Master Xehanort, and Mickey Mouse they both had the Birth By Sleep video and The Gathering video and they didn't erase it like in Vanitas. In this page why can't Vanitas had both? Vanitas isn't included The Gathering is one thing and he dosen't appear in it I understand but his fisrt appearance is in the Birth By Sleep video. So why isn't Birth By Sleep video article mention in Vanitas? If the video article for Vanitas is too big just make it small enough to not watse space, or just include everything in BBS video about Vanitas in the Vanitas page. I thought you guys want to improve articles in this wikia not erase the truth? Beside you're saying that the Riku in Deep Dive is before he went to Catsle Oblivion who told you that? This happen after KHCOM and 358/2 Days not between KHI and KHCOM. cococrash11
 * Please don't be an idiot.


 * 1) The placement of the Deep Dive video in Riku's article would be between KH and KHCom, which is incorrect.
 * 2) It's specifically not truth, it's un-fucking-canon.

If you're unwilling to listen at all to what the other person is saying, then just shut up, please. Glorious  CHAOS!  13:23, October 31, 2009 (UTC)

Shut up! What you did dosne't make any sense. Beside the secret video deep dive is after KH1 FInal Mix and not the story line but the game producction history you idiot. Cococrash11

I will say it again.

THE STORY SECTIONS ARE NOT JUST DESCRIPTIONS OF WHAT THE CHARACTER HAS APPEARED IN. They are descriptions, in the style of timelines, of what happens to the character during the storyline of the series.

As placed, the secret video synopses claim that the characters did those things immediately after KH1 and KH2. That is nonsense. Riku did not defeat Roxas immediately after KH1 - he waited two games to do it.

This is pretty much exactly what I said two comments ago, and the fact that you're rambling on about production history (when I've been emphasizing the CANON STATUS as the important point) only shows that you're spending your time complaining instead of actually listening. I know damn well when the videos were produced; however, they are NOT CANON, and DO NOT FIT INTO THE CHARACTER'S PLOT SYNOPSIS, any more than the trading card game does. That is why I suggested that the information pertaining to the secret videos be covered specifically on that video's page, and to only have a link to it here.
 * In the future, instead of complaining in what is barely English, please reread the first person's comment so they don't have to repeat it multiple times. Glorious  CHAOS!  20:11, October 31, 2009 (UTC)
 * As for your complaining on my talk page - if you can prove that those are the plots for those games, and not just people assuming things from the small snippets we do know, feel free to add them back in. As that is currently impossible, since the game isn't finished, I kind of doubt you'll be able to. As those pages were, they were making false claims, which is unacceptable. Glorious  CHAOS!  20:20, October 31, 2009 (UTC)

GS undefined

Sephiroth? Irrelevant.
Vanitas being similar to Sephiroth is completely irrelevant. When I used to say irrelevant things it would get deleted. This is as well.


 * Well, the fact that Nomura makes some stupid joke about voicing him doesn't either. As I had said, let staff decide. Trivia is filled with the irrelevant. Accept it. - EternalNothingnessXIII 21:37, November 6, 2009 (UTC)


 * Using the exact same quote as another character designed by the same person is not irrelevant, though.
 * Anon, if someone disagrees with your edit, you discuss it on the talk page, you don't get into an edit war, or you'll get temporarily blocked. If you are unable to have patience in a discussion, then you're not actually discussing, you're just demanding you get your way. That's not how it works.
 * EO, the wiki is not ruled by the staff. A better reason for reverting the anon's edit was that he hadn't discussed it or given an edit reason, which is what needs to be done when removing content (unless blatantly vandalism). But if you two can come to a cordial decision on your own, that is much preferable than dragging the staff into it.
 * I've changed it to something that uses the most recent use of that quote by a Nomura character, in what I feel is a more likely analogy. However, it's still a very common thing for the bad guy to say, so it would be fair to remove it if there is still contriversy. Glorious  CHAOS!  22:23, November 6, 2009 (UTC)

I realized the potential edit war. That was why I mentioned staff. I know how things work. Sephiroth has more to do with than Garland, however. We could phrase it as :


 * Vanitas/Sephiroth thing...(insert Garland connection here)

That way, we add even MORE redundancy. Sephiroth has the plot connection, and Garland has the character creator connection. - EternalNothingnessXIII 22:27, November 6, 2009 (UTC)

... "This is a battle quote utilized by Sephiroth, another man who turns to darkness and abandons his old allegiences in the Final Fantasy series, similar to how this Keyblade warrior falls to the dark and leaves the Keyblade masters of the Realm of Light."

Replace "Sephiroth" with "Garland" and you still have a true statement. Hell, Garland turns more literally to darkness than Sephiroth, who just throws a mega-tantrum. And Garland literally leaves the masters of Light, and is a parallel to the "Warrior of Light" (coughcough Ventus coughcough). Then, we have that Sephiroth has already appeared as a totally separate character in KH, negating any possibility for him to be Vanitas.
 * If we keep the trivia note at all, Garland and not Sephiroth should be used, I think. There's just no way that a Vanitas-Sephiroth connection would "mean" anything, since Vanitas is explicitly not Sephiroth. Glorious  CHAOS!  22:37, November 6, 2009 (UTC)
 * There's no way he'd be Garland though. I'd say the only fair thing we do is come up with some way to combine the two. They're both right. - EternalNothingnessXIII 22:40, November 6, 2009 (UTC)
 * I honestly think that using Sephiroth is stretching it, though, since Shinra was never the paragon of light, and Sephiroth didn't so much go straight to Darkness as just decide that everyone else was evil.
 * I guess it is somewhat relevant in that Sephiroth uses the quote within the KH series, but it's still pushing it to relate Vanitas to him, I feel. Glorious  CHAOS!  22:49, November 6, 2009 (UTC)

I know, Kryten, and I respect your opinion. Don't get me wrong. We really don't know how Vanitas tursn to darkness, or how/why/if he even does. I think we should stick with Sephiroth, as he's actually in KH. As I said, I think we could somehow mention Garland, as well. - EternalNothingnessXIII 22:52, November 6, 2009 (UTC)


 * If your sum total of "contribution" is to come in and say "Look at me!", then please go the fuck away. You are annoying as all get out. Glorious  CHAOS!  00:06, November 9, 2009 (UTC)

I agreed! You've been nothing, but trouble lately! You're worst than everyone at school I know! What the heck is your problem, anyway!?! I'm sick of you! Seeing you strut around like you're always right! OUI'NA YH YCCRUMA!-- Ninja Sheik  00:10, November 9, 2009 (UTC)
 * Calling someone an asshole, even in another language should not be tolerated. NinjaSheik don't do it again and apologize as your intervention in this discussion was pointless and rude. -- 00:22, November 9, 2009 (UTC)

Fine, I'm sorry for cursing. But, that doesn't chnage how I feel...-- Ninja Sheik  00:25, November 9, 2009 (UTC)


 * One thing is cursing during a conversation and another completely different thing is directly insulting someone. Some people are fine with cursing and some aren't but what is NOT tolerated is a direct attack towards a user. That's exactly why we ban trolls who blank out talk pages and why we don't encourage editors to leave hate messages in said troll's talk pages along with the warnings. -- 00:29, November 9, 2009 (UTC)

Okay...Sorry.-- Ninja Sheik  00:33, November 9, 2009 (UTC)

Somehow, I just don't see the connection. Can you please explain how Vanitas, a character who has not had that many lines of dialoge, is similar to Garland, a character who has very little personality. Ult ima 08:20, November 9, 2009 (UTC)
 * NV: no one was arguing over content with you. I was asking you to just leave, because you are completely insufferable in your inability to just discuss the article with others without calling other editors idiots and generally acting like a know-it-all. Plus, the whole vandalizing the article to be facetious.
 * Ultima: It's a connection that's barely there, but if people want to mention that shared line of dialogue, Garland is the most recent character Nomura was involved with that used that line, and he does have a similar basic plot. However, it's really nothing at all - really, it's just that any connection with Sephiroth isn't useful. It's perfectly acceptable, at least from my point of view, to remove the trivia line completely, because it's a very generic "evil rival" thing to say. Glorious  CHAOS!  08:30, November 9, 2009 (UTC)


 * And from your edits, the only contributions I can see are small edits to the trivia. I think I can safely say that if you were not able to be here, the trivia would be safely handled by anyone else. As I told you a while back, if you want to claim that you're helpful, do it without trying to make the other editors miserable. You aren't the golden boy you think you are, and if you want to be respected, you can't have that attitude. Glorious  CHAOS!  01:43, November 10, 2009 (UTC)

Vanitas = Leon
Before I begin, sorry if this isn't formated right. ANYWAYS, I was thinking the other day about Vanitas' true identity and I just so happen to be reading Leon's bio, it says that Leon changed his name to escape his past, well maybe Leon was ashamed of what he did with Master Xehenort and changed his name. Plus look at the end of Leon's gunblade, there's a key chain that Leon could've modified to turn his Keyblade into a gunblade. Leon would be about 15 during the events of Birth By Sleep, puting him around the age of Terra, Aqua, and Ventus. I know this theory is a little shaky, but I'd like your thoughts. Ookami Hitomatome 21:25, November 30, 2009 (UTC)

I know his name was Squall, but he could've changed his to hide is identity. Plus he's the only character right now that could be him, they say that Vanitas' identity would be reveled at the end of Birth By Sleep. Ookami Hitomatome 22:11, November 30, 2009 (UTC)
 * What he means is that the story explicitly says that Leon used to be named Squall, but changed his name due to shame he felt for failing during the evacuation of Hollow Bastion, not some unspecific darkness in his past. Most likely due to the group losing Cloud, or some other FF character. While Leon sure knows more about the Keyblade than is reasonable, it is completely possible he learned it just from the Ansem Reports (which they do claim, at one point).128.210.26.20 22:16, November 30, 2009 (UTC)

Yea...true.... OK. I'm turning this post into a "Find Vanitas' Identity" thing. Who could possibly be Vanitas besides any FF character?

Ookami Hitomatome 22:27, November 30, 2009 (UTC)


 * Vanitas is probably the Darkness in Ventus' heart or something...  BLUER   一番   16:12, December 7, 2009 (UTC)

Vanitas's identity
I honestly dont care if they dont reavel who he is, that mask thing looks awesome! imo Vanitas is the Young version of Xahnort who was in kingdom hearts, he probobly gose insane with power, takes his masters name, and at the end of the game is found by ansem the wise.--Foutlet 20:47, December 1, 2009 (UTC)

It couldnt be Xehenort because he was working with Ansem the Wise

Ookami Hitomatome 00:01, December 2, 2009 (UTC)

Possibly Vanitas could be: Ansem the wise. Terra's Emboiment of darkness [Xehanort] (like cloud/Sephorth). It's not Leon, Leon doesnt make that important relevance in Kigndom Hearts series. Not as much as terra and DIZ

Could be Riku's Dad

Could be Terra's Mirror of himself... it could possibly be what terra TRULY is...DARKNESS

. That's why Master Xehanort asks him to try and defeat Vanitas because he wants to test Terra to see if he can really beat darkness itself. or will he eventually succumb to darkness..............

Zera
ke onda!! whats up everyone XDDD.^_^

Vanitas's voice actor
In KH13.com it said Vanitas has the same voice as Sora. --Cococrash11 21:24, December 19, 2009 (UTC)Cococrash11

naaaaah it can't be

People saying "Oh, he sounded like so'n'so" is not actual confirmation. Is there an interview, a magazine article, was it mentioned on the actor's website? Is there anything that's an actual source, and not just people trying to recognize a voice from a trailer? HarpieSiren 22:14, December 19, 2009 (UTC)

I don't think there is anything saying that they share a voice but Vanitas does sound a bit like Sora, only older but seeing all the mystery surrounding Vanitas we'll probably have to wait until the game comes out in a couple of weeks.--Masgrande 01:30, December 21, 2009 (UTC)

Xemnas limit = All VANITY
Coincidence ? Vanitas = Vanity ... We do know Vanitas has a connection to Ven... Maybe his fight against Terra made him forget everything... maybe Terra's essence and his will fuse somehow during Terra's sacrifice in order to get rid of him or something... thus creating the empty shell Xehanort. The story is forced to end badly for Terra, so either he becomes Xehanort, either he dies trying to kill Xehanort or his apprentice. But I think he's responsible for the "new" Xehanort.--Ataradesu 01:55, December 21, 2009 (UTC)

Not Xehanort's Apprentice
I think it's Xehanort's plan in order to gain the trios trust. 80.101.62.155 21:45, January 1, 2010 (UTC)

An idea for Vanitas' Appearance.
http://i78.photobucket.com/albums/j81/gracefulassassin9/2d7sh2p.png http://i78.photobucket.com/albums/j81/gracefulassassin9/Picture5-1.png http://i78.photobucket.com/albums/j81/gracefulassassin9/2d7sh2p2.png http://i78.photobucket.com/albums/j81/gracefulassassin9/2d7sh2p3.png http://i78.photobucket.com/albums/j81/gracefulassassin9/2d7sh2p4.png http://i78.photobucket.com/albums/j81/gracefulassassin9/Picture6-1.png

Is there a familiar face under that Daft Punk helmet? You decide.

I'm really quite curious, where is it ever said that eye is Vanitas's? We need confirmation that it's supposed to be Vanitas. 24.165.55.99 00:50, January 6, 2010 (UTC)

I have seen the trailer, in fact it must be about 10 times by now. But I fail to see any proof that the eye is Vanitas's. Unless it's stated in an interview that came out with the trailer or something, then so far the idea that it's his eye is speculation. 24.165.55.99 03:52, January 7, 2010 (UTC)

Vanitas' identity
I think you all are wrong. Vanitas is meant to be a new character. He is not a character from the older kh series. He is most certainly not Sora or Ven, or Xehanort. There is supposed to not be aany connection between him and an older character.

Vanitas is almost certainly an Unversed:
Vanitas: a type of symbolic work of art especially associated with Northern European still life painting in Flanders and the Netherlands in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, though also common in other places and periods. The word is Latin, meaning "emptiness" and loosely translated corresponds to the meaninglessness of earthly life and the transient nature of vanity...Vanitas themes were common in medieval funerary art, with most surviving examples in sculpture. By the 15th century these could be extremely morbid and explicit, reflecting an increased obsession with death and decay also seen in the Ars moriendi, Danse Macabre and the overlapping motif of the Memento mori.

Glorious  CHAOS!  15:16, January 7, 2010 (UTC)