Forum:Etymology and Appearances

Forums: Index > The World that Never was > Etymology and Appearances

KrytenKoro - "Punch your lights out, hit the pavement. That's what I call entertainment. Causin' problems makes you famous - all the violence makes a statement." TALK - How do we want to handle Etymologies specifically? Do we want etymology for everything, just mythology and "foreign" words, or anything that is an "uncommon" word? Also, do we want to include such things for the Heartless? So, explaining that "A gargoyle is a such and such"? This could also tie into or replace an Appearance section, if we don't think the image is sufficient. Do we want to have "Appearance" sections, for that matter, describing the subject's design?

DoorToNothing — I dreamed last night... I got on the boat to Heaven! And by some chance, I had brought my dice along! — 23:04, October 28, 2009 (UTC) For enemies and weapons, I think that all information on appearance can be handled in the opening paragraph(s). There isn't usually an incredible amount of information in their "Appearance" section as it is. However, for characters, I think that there is too much information to put into the introduction. Unless if we were to compress all of that information into less words, I would suggest just leaving characters with an "Appearance" section.

Characters do already have an appearance section don't they ? Helping others always comes before asking others for help. • TroisNyxÉtienne — 23:48, October 28, 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, some of them do, but not all of them. Xehanort's Heartless, for example, does not. I intend to get an appearance section up for those characters that lack one anyway. I'd like to offer to put up an appearance section for enemies like the individual Heartless and Nobodies as well, but KrytenKoro suggested I bringit up here first. Thoughts on that? LapisScarab 05:10, October 30, 2009 (UTC)

Let's see... if there are extensive details about the appearance, like what the Grim Reaper would have (references to an Inca god), then it's something worth mentioning. Otherwise, I don't think so... if there are only a few things about the appearance to say, then they should go onto the introduction. Helping others always comes before asking others for help. • TroisNyxÉtienne — 05:13, October 30, 2009 (UTC)

DoorToNothing — I dreamed last night... I got on the boat to Heaven! And by some chance, I had brought my dice along! — 05:15, October 30, 2009 (UTC) Like I said before, appearance information for Heartless and Nobodies is usually so simple that it is insufficent to have an "Appearance" section. I suggest that we wait for the thoughts of KrytenKoro, since he is the one who sent LapisScarab here. Plus, he started this topic, so probably has the most detailed outlook. Ping?

Yep, ping ! ^_^ I'm as good as new! All my functions have been restored! • TroisNyxÉtienne — 05:17, October 30, 2009 (UTC)

KrytenKoro - "Hey, I want to settle down. And as soon as I find the right small group of girls, the seven or eight women who are right for me, my wandering days are over, buddy." TALK - Actu..ually, I started the topic because I didn't want to have to decide. I personally am fine with either choice, I just want to make sure it's what we all agreed on so that we can decide what it should be like. If we do decide to do it, I think the appearance section should specifically be based around explaining the origin of the design - with the Gargoyle, it should be "In European mythology, Gargoyles are an x", and explaining stuff like that. I don't think we need a full rundown , like "They have the yellow shiny eyes", etc., just what makes them unique. However, it's definitely important to note where their emblem is.