Talk:Xemnas

Single format
On the Organization XIII articles, or perhaps even all character articles in general: they really do need to have one single format. For instance, Vexen has an origin section, while everyone else does not. Speaking of, I really think the Organization XIII origins should all just be put in the actual Organization XIII article, or, everyone else can also have an origin section.

But, to get back on track, one single format can make the articles seem more orderly. Thoughts? DannyP 23:02, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Weaponry
Xemnas' weapon is actually not the red blades. His panel was destroyed, like Zexion, so we don't know what he uses. Plus, the Armored Controller uses a massive halberd. 63.113.61.147


 * Yes it is. Xemnas never even HAD a panel. Xemnas clearly uses Aerial Blades as his primary weapons. And his Armored Version doesn't count, because that's not his natural form and weaponry. Besides, Ultimania states Xemnas' weapon as such. How do you think everyone got the name?


 * Seriously, end of story. DannyP 15:38, 27 March 2007 (UTC)


 * (grr, edit conflict) Doesn't he use a big sword when he's all armored up? And I don't think he has a weapon panel... anyway, this is why I think it should have a section link in the infobox that goes to all the weapons he uses.  Sure, his "official" weapon is aerial blades, but the infobox doesn't necessarily need to be an ultimania stats copypaste, if it had a link to relevant info about all the weapons he uses it would still be informative.  I've long stopped reverting by now, but I still don't think it's a sacred thing to have the infoboxes look exactly as Ultimania does., having it say that his weapons vary would be more clear.   Scott  ch  15:43, 27 March 2007 (UTC)


 * But the infobox should be a description of Xemnas' natural state...especially when the picture is of his natural state (well, this isn't that serious of a point). What he uses when powered up should be something else entirely. It'd be pretty misleading otherwise. DannyP 15:51, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Actually, the bit about the fact that the pic is him in natural form is a pretty good point :) Makes me a lot more uncomfortable about having "aerial blades" in the infobox, so no more disagreement from me.   Scott  ch  16:48, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Very well then. I admit defeat. I didn't know what the Ultimania guide said. But Xemnas' panel was smashed.CyberXIII 14:05, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't remember him having a panel,are you sure he did?  Scott  ch  18:20, 29 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Xemnas doesn't have a panel. The closest thing is that barrier preventing you from going any further. DannyP 01:47, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Sorry for all the trouble. I checked again, and DannyP is right. The Superior has no panel.CyberXIII 14:05, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Mansex
I'm sorry, but this "observation" is really just juvenile. It makes Xemnas and the content of this article seem a little ridiculous, nor is it really "humorous"--in short, it doesn't really reflect well on the Wiki. I mean, c'mon, are such ridiculous jokes like this actually funny, OR notable? DannyP 22:40, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I didn't laugh real hard, but it's probably one of the most common fan jokes out there about Org XIII. I question the addition of "Dilan's name anagrams to Linda", having never heard it before, for example, but I hear the mansex one all the time.  If nothing else, look how much the Xemnas part of Organization XIII gets vandalized :-)  Maybe it would read better if more fan-ish info was added and combined into its own section?   Scott  ch  23:00, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
 * It doesn't matter about how well known it is. It's still really, really juvenile. Adding such things just lessens the quality of the article, in my opinion. But, for its own section, I don't really know. DannyP 21:43, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I also think we should remove it. Its very immature, not to mention annoying. -- SFH 23:19, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Of course I won't go alone against the wishes of two editors, but is not liking something really a good reason to not have it mentioned? I don't particularly like that Zexion and Marluxia got iced before Kingdom Hearts II, but I'm not just going to cut that info out of the articles.   Scott  ch  23:30, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
 * It's not a simple matter of liking, or in this case, not liking, something. For "Mansex", it just really doesn't contribute positively to the article. People are going to see it as really juvenile, and therefore see the article in a worse light. Besides, Marluxia and Zexion's deaths do not parallel the whole thing with "Mansex", because that's in-game information that cannot be argued against. DannyP 04:55, 29 April 2007 (UTC)