Talk:Roxas: Difference between revisions

From the Kingdom Hearts Wiki, the Kingdom Hearts encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
Line 197: Line 197:
:::::I agree. The way Roxas looks in the image isn't that different from how he usually looks to warrant a mention on the page. I think we should just move the image to the gallery. {{User:TheSilentHero/Sig}} 19:13, 3 August 2019 (UTC)
:::::I agree. The way Roxas looks in the image isn't that different from how he usually looks to warrant a mention on the page. I think we should just move the image to the gallery. {{User:TheSilentHero/Sig}} 19:13, 3 August 2019 (UTC)
::::::Agreed. The trivia should be removed and the image goes to Roxas's Gallery, if it isn't there already.--{{User:NinjaSheik/Sig}} 19:16, 3 August 2019 (UTC)
::::::Agreed. The trivia should be removed and the image goes to Roxas's Gallery, if it isn't there already.--{{User:NinjaSheik/Sig}} 19:16, 3 August 2019 (UTC)
:::It's not trivia because it's covering his appearance in officially published material. The design section is the correct location for that. The design section is not required to focus solely on the games, or the "canon depiction". It's meant for the topic overall, which ''does'' include information about the out-universe design process, marketing decisions, and depictions in non-game material.
:::"We need to revisit the topic if the artwork itself is noteworthy to be mentioned at all?" -- no, we don't. We are not wikipedia, we are the kingdom hearts wiki. Our scope is to cover ''everything'' official. If "notability" were a factor in how we cover information, we wouldn't have articles like [[Mimic]] or [[Axe Flapper]].
:::"because some people really like the information for reasons I don't understand." --- quit it with trying to turn things personal. This isn't about "liking" or "not liking" the information, this is about the fact that it's information from an official source, and that wiki policy states to avoid putting information in the trivia section at all times. A staff member should have already corrected you on this behavior.
:::Furthermore, it's a complete lie that you "don't understand", because I explained the relevant policies for it to you in simple English. That you keep trying to reframe this as some debate about "canon" or whether it was an "accident" doesn't change the relevant policies.
:::"so I didn't mean to start an edit war" -- then you shouldn't have kept pushing your edit after another editor reverted it and explained the relevant policies. It is inconceivable that you didn't realize that you were making a third revert. Don't blame this on past discussions.
:::"It doesn't work because there's nowhere in any related media suggesting it was ever a thing" -- what are you even trying to say here? The section is saying that there is a piece of published material where he has a unique appearance. That's it. It's not trying to paint this as evidence for some conspiracy theory.
:::"Sometimes a person is drawn off model or different then usual, it doesn't mean it's necessarily something meaningful." -- nothing and no one is claiming it's "meaningful". They're claiming it's a fact. Roxas is drawn significantly off-model in a piece of artwork that was itself used in a major way for advertisement. That's worth mentioning -- and the writeup as is even took pains to make it clear that that doesn't "mean" anything. It's just a fact. The wiki reports facts, and leaves it up to the readers to derive any unstated meaning from that.
:::"so it doesn't make sense to pretend it was some sort of "early concept art" or anything." --- nowhere did this happen.
:::"In my opinion this really is a non-issue and has no place on this wiki" -- okay, well with all due respect, your opinion is wrong. It's official material, therefore, we cover it. That's the defined scope of the wiki. We cover all official material.
:::"Roxas on the cover of KH2 looks drastically different from how Roxas appears on the cover of 358/2 Days." -- this is a facile argument. Roxas on the artwork can be directly compared to Ventus, who has been established time and time again as having an identical face to Roxas.
:::"but whether Roxas looks older or not, whether it was unintentional or intentional on Nomura-sensei's part, is unknown, and as an encyclopedia, we need to remain objective as possible." --- this statement makes no sense. The section wasn't claiming that it was intentional or not. It was claiming that it was there. As far as "whether he looks older or not", you can directly compare him to Ventus in the same image.
:::"We aren’t mentioning Xehanort’s face looking warped on the cover of 2.5 because it’s a stylistic choice." -- there's no real reason not to (not that I'm really sure what you're talking about -- he has an eyebrow raised). I think the lot of you are quite misunderstanding how the wiki's scope works, or what the design section is for. Alternate styles and depictions, such as Goofy-Riku or Donald-Kairi in KHUX, are fair game. The design and origin sections are both ones in which we cover the topics from an ''out of universe'' viewpoint, which means including information that would not be part of the "inner truth" within the setting.
:::Frankly, as a former admin of this site I'm pretty disappointed in the longtime editors involved in these edits both leaving the protected state of the page on the ''new'', non-consensus-demonstrated version (very irregular), and so blithely ignoring the long-standing, ''very'' consensus policy of doing ''everything possible'' to keep information from being moved to trivia sections. It has always been wiki policy that it's the obligation of the editor trying to move information to trivia that they show, ''referencing wiki policies and not their own preferences'', that the information more properly belongs there than elsewhere in the article, and achieve consensus in doing so. That absolutely has not happened. It is quite simply shocking that this issue has even gotten to this point, as there are a multitude of wiki policies that should have been followed preventing this.{{User:KrytenKoro/Sig}} 12:37, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

Revision as of 12:39, 5 August 2019


Roxas Dual Wielding (Xion's Keyblade Not Ventus's)

LeaTalkAngryZ.png
iZerox What's your problem?! — 14:00, September 7, 2010 (UTC)
Lea Frisbee.png "This marks the start of where he gains his signature ability to dual-wield, as he awakens Ventus's Keyblade after her demise. The first time he uses them, it shows two Kingdom Keys, his and Ventus's, which quickly transform into the Oathkeeper and Oblivion."

Where has it ever been stated officially that the second keyblade was Ventus's keyblade. It doesn't even make sense to me considering that when Roxas is running towards Riku and is compelled to toss they keyblade to Riku, Riku starts to have flash backs of memories of Xion because he came in contact with the keyblade. And the fact that Roxas couldn't dual wield until Xion had faded away only seems to indicate to me that he was using hers. Xion may have been a copy created from memories but she was real just as much as Roxas was physically. I believe the same applies to their keyblades as well, you can't kill heartless with an imaginary weapon that doesn't exist physically. It only makes sense to me that Xion's keyblade was passed to him, after all she could wield his keyblade what would be the reasoning for him not being able to wield hers? All this seems to highly indicate that it would be her keyblade he wields and nothing to do with Ventus.


Riku Replica (Talk sprite) 1 KHCOM.png
Xabryn - Golden Star Charm.pngI don't care if you're real!You're not better!
TALK - Mobile rikurep.pngIt's nice to have darkness on my side.14:09, September 7, 2010 (UTC)
Heartless Emblem.pngNomura stated in an interview that it was Ventus Keyblade, and that Roxas desire of not losing Xion's memories made the ability awake inside him(Not sure if that's it but it is sure similar)
209.png
KrytenKoro - "That's when we bumped into Hannity. Sean Hannity. See the thing about this dude is, at first he's fair, right? And you're like "Wow!" But then BOOM. The dude's balanced, too. And you're like, HOLY SHIT."
TALK -
Since Xion was stealing Roxas's powers, it could also be that her Keyblade IS Ventus's, but that's unconfirmed.


LeaTalkSadZ.png
iZerox Think I'll pass. My heart won't be in it. Don't have one, you know? — 20:41, September 7, 2010 (UTC)
Lea Frisbee.png *sigh* I guess that works. Can't argue with the creator. Though Kryten's idea makes sense.


mediventus.png
LegoAlchemist - They changed "Snipe Magnet" to "Magnet Grab"? Who's translating this game, 4kids?
TALK - Friendships are in direct contravention of mercenary conduct as delineated in your contracts, and on a personal note: I am very, very, disappointed with you.
Vsymbol.png I agree, iZerox. After all, Ventus doesn't wield Kingdom Key.

As for Nomura's confirmation, we also can't forget Kryten's Wall o' text battleship that underlines how inconsistent Nomura is with Keyblade possession. But go figure.

Hey how everybody doin!

Wrong place for this, talk pages are for discussion of the article only. --Evnyofdeath 22:38, September 8, 2010 (UTC)

Actually, since it was over the content included in the article, 'tis fine. --DTN Room Core.png 20:34, February 2, 2011 (UTC)


Tha tscreenshot of Roxas at the Dark Merdian isn't tah tsupposed to be Xemnas? I mean the yellow eye kinda says it.--NejiHyugaRocks 18:01, September 22, 2010 (UTC)

No, that's Roxas. Xemnas was sitting on the rock.Glorious CHAOS! 18:24, September 22, 2010 (UTC)

The picture in the trivia section.

Why do you guys keep bringing up the promotional artwork of Roxas where he apparently looks "older"? I don't see anything to suggest that he is in anyway older looking or anything. It's just the way he is drawn and the angle that he is at, and I've asked other people who said they don't see any difference either. He doesn't look any different so why do you guys keep adding it?—Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.96.198.72 (talkcontribs)

Because it's blinking obvious that he looks older. Ventus is right there in the same artwork - this Roxas has a more pronounced chin, a more muscular chest, a longer neck, a larger adam's apple - everything to suggest he is Axel's age.Glorious CHAOS! 22:32, September 25, 2010 (UTC)
No, it's not. He doesn't look any older. It's the way he is drawn. I am an artist myself, and I know if you draw something at a certain angle, then the subject will look different than it would at another angle. His chin looks more pronounced? No, it simply looks like he's tilt his head up and to the side slightly, as is obviously meant to be the case. Those aren't muscles, those are his collar bones. Necks look long depending on the way you look at them. All that you've given me is stuff cannot irrefutably be given as evidence that Roxas looks older than he actually is.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.96.198.72 (talkcontribs)
Ventus's chin slopes back - Roxas's juts forward.
His hand looks to fill the entire guard of the Kingdom Key, when it usually leaves a lot of empty space
He has a muscle jutting out in his neck, and it is noticeably longer compared to how it looks in other images (ex: :File:KH Days trio.jpg)
His hair juts back instead of forward, and follows his neck all the way down to his shoulders, rather than projecting.
Yes, those are his collarbones, but his actual chest is more prounced - again, compare it to the trio image. You usually can't even see his collarbone, because he has a smooth chest.
This is a very rough approximation, but the length of his Keyblade, it looks like it only compares from the top of his head to midway down his chest. In his other images, it goes down to about his waist.
Maybe he's just drawn using elements from the other Organization members in that image, but he just doesn't look like the young little shorty he usually does. But it just doesn't look like him.Glorious CHAOS! 13:24, September 26, 2010 (UTC)
That doesn't mean he's supposed to look older, it's a just coincidence if he does. It's nothing worth noting, and that's what I'm trying to get across. Obviously Tetsuya Nomura tried to draw Roxas different to distinguish him from Ventus, seeing as at the time everyone was still convinced that Ventus was Roxas.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.96.198.72 (talkcontribs)
That's just a guess. The fact is, it's a significant departure from Roxas's normal character design, and whether it's a coincidence or deliberate, it's still notable. --Neumannz, The Dark Falcon 19:54, September 26, 2010 (UTC)
No, Nomura even had to specifically state that Ventus was not Roxas in an interview before and after this artwork was released.
So if he's drawing him different to distinguish him from Ventus, who he is essentially a doppelganger of...doesn't that mean he's drawn differently than normal?Glorious CHAOS! 20:22, September 26, 2010 (UTC)
Yes, but that doesn't make him older, just different.

Yeah, it makes him look older, but this looks like a case of bad artwork more than anything else. I don't really think an artistic screw up is all that important, but then again we did mention that typo on Lea's page.LapisLazuliScarab21:52, September 26, 2010 (UTC)

If it is just a case of bad artwork, then I don't understand even more why it's even important to mention it. Especially since there are probably better trivia to put in than that artwork.
Arg.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.96.198.72 (talkcontribs)
  1. It's a distinctly different design that was used as a prominent piece of advertising when these three games were announced.
  2. Trivia is NEVER desired. There is no such thing as "better trivia to put in." Everything there should be necessary, and this is.Glorious CHAOS! 23:35, September 26, 2010 (UTC)
No it isn't, it is a promotional piece of work that has nothing to do with the games other than being promotional. Why don't you put cover art for Kingdom Hearts II on display and say, hey the Ultima Weapon keychain from the first game is featured, that must mean it is important. And you know what, I'm done with this. If you want to put stuff up that doesn't have any IMPORTANT meaning, then go right the hell ahead. I'm wasting my time with this.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.96.198.72 (talkcontribs)
We, ah, do have coverage on that kind of stuff, actually. And, huh, being the only public piece of promotion at the first announcement of this three-game set seems pretty relevant to me.Glorious CHAOS! 05:44, September 27, 2010 (UTC)
Whatever you say. And you completely missed my sarcasm.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.96.198.72 (talkcontribs)
Didn't miss it, you just picked an example that fails as sarcasm.Glorious CHAOS! 13:46, September 27, 2010 (UTC)

Truthfully, I don't really care that much about that picture, but I don't see what the point of putting that link to the puzzle mechanic from KHII Final Mix was. I mean, it's a gameplay mechanic, not an actual piece of the story. The pictures don't have any effect on the story, so I don't see how putting up that link helps your argument for the supposedly older Roxas picture. Perhaps someone can enlighten me on that?—Preceding unsigned comment added by OmegaWeapon13 (talkcontribs)

...really? You asked why "we don't have coverage of the cover arts", and I link you to where we do? Pretty spastic you are, young padawan."We're werewolves, not swearwolves." (KrytenKoro) 15:32, December 25, 2010 (UTC)

Appeared In KH1 and Final Mix

TECHNICALLY, Roxas appeared in Kingdom Hearts 1 and Kingdom Hearts Final Mix during the secret episode. So how come it is not shown on his page.


Riku Replica (Talk sprite) 1 KHCOM.png
CaelumLucisCaliga - Why do I feel so... 2-dimensional?
TALK - 17:02, November 27, 2010 (UTC)
Heartless Emblem.pngWe don't count secret videos, as they are not considered to be in the actual game. For example, Riku, Roxas, and Xemnas were all in Deep Dive. Riku is considered to be in KHI and FM cause he really was. Xemnas is considered to be in FM only because in there, he appears as a secret, optional boss. Roxas is only in the secret ending, so he's not considered to be in KHI at all. I really hope this isn't ... lengthy.

That can't be true than how did Roxas,Xion & Axel are in BBS?

Gallery

Tron KHII.png
LightRoxas - "I fight for the Users!"
TALK - "I'm also better than you!"
The majority of the organization has one. Sora has one. So shouldn't Roxas also have a separate gallery page showcasing all his various photos? I'd do it myself, but I don't know enough about editing.


sephirothshockedtbs.png
Sephiroth0812 - I admit you're very skilled...
TALK - The planet has forsaken me... - 00:04, December 21, 2010 (UTC)
Wait, what? As far as I can see Roxas's article has a gallery already...


ms8C4ef.png
Chitalian8 Say... — Only by allowing strangers in can we find new ways to be ourselves.

Life's little crossroads are often as simple as the pull of a trigger. — 00:05, December 21, 2010 (UTC)

20px-Pin_000.png He's talking about a seperate gallery page, in the Galleryspace. And he is right, no such page exists.


sephsprite.png
Sephiroth0812 - Let's see what this "Light" of yours can do!
TALK - I see, so that's a keyblade... - 00:07, December 21, 2010 (UTC)
Oh, my bad then...*ggg*. Still a newbie after all it seems. ;)


Tron KHII.png
LightRoxas - "I fight for the Users!"
TALK - "I'm also better than you!"
That's alright Sephy, I'm still pretty new too.


Roxas (Oathkeeper and Oblivion)
LightRoxas Talk! — "Get real! Look which one of us is winning!"

Axel went somewhere. He went to sleep.

Alright, I've started the page here, but it still needs more images that I couldn't find. Anyone wanna help out?


TBSRoxas-Art.png
Soxra - Behold! For my very existence refutes the will of the gods! I am a will unto my own, a power that shakes the very foundation of creation!
Talk to me! - Soxxeh 8:14pm, December 27, 2010 (UTC)
If no one's added any by the time I get home from work, I'll put some up. I've been gathering a list of images for every character, and now seems like the perfect time to use it.

Article Clean up

DaysAxel.png
Dark Master - You need it memorized.
TALK - {{{time}}}
Roxas' artical needs a major improvements especially in the Kingdom Hearts II section.I will try to fix but I may need help.


asdftb2.png
17master - Hey, guys, check out my new camera!
TALK - Oh wait, this isn't a camera... - {{{time}}}
and the format, some articles have "Abilities" while some have "Fighting Style"

Anagrams

Is it worth metioning that Roxas is an anagram of Sora, with the trademake X of the Orginisation added in. He seems to be the only member like that and I think its purposeful, although I am not sure if Xemnas or who ever picked his name that he was Sora's nobody.

...wow. Just...wow. maggosh 22:04, February 1, 2011 (UTC)
[1] Chitalian8 22:05, February 1, 2011 (UTC)


f8df6681-2aeb-4bf1-ab6e-88456638bacc_zpsd683a238.png
Roxas Wanna talk to Me? Roxas's Symbol small.pngNobody.png "I'm Roxas." Nobody.pngRoxas's Symbol small.png

"We could find the real thieves. That would set the record straight." twobecomeoneright.png — 22:09, February 1, 2011 (UTC)

OathOblivTalkPic_zps6eebf78e.png All of the Organization members' names are anagrams of their original selves i.e Xigbar=Braig, Xaldin=Dilan, Vexen=Evan, Axel=Lea, and Roxas=Sora. All of them have the letters of the somebody anagramed and has a X added. Xemnas whose original name was Xehanort is the only special case as his name is an anagram of Ansem which is the name he stole from Ansem the Wise. You did take a look at the rest of the members??? OathOblivTalkPic_zps6eebf78e.png

Sorry, quite new to the series... What about Xion, she is also sora's nobody kind of and yet she is not an anagram. I understand the mistake. Sorry about that one, I didnt know about the other peoples names, I feel a bit stupid now... Sorry

Xion is an imperfect Replica of Roxas made from memories of Sora. Xion is an anagram of "No. i" where "i" is the imaginary number, "i". Chitalian8 19:55, February 2, 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for clearing that one up for me :D

Speculation?

Riku Replica (Talk sprite) 1 KHCOM.png
CaelumLucisCaliga - Why do I feel so... 2-dimensional?
TALK - 04:03, February 7, 2011 (UTC)
Heartless Emblem.png"He also asks a strange question: "Tell me... Tell me why he picked you!", referring to the Keyblade (the confusion actually stems from from a mistranslation in dialogue) and attacks Sora in a rage. At one point, Roxas floats from above, and sees the images of Riku, Kairi, Donald, and Goofy next to Sora, and finally understands that Sora has the Keyblade because of the bond with his friends."

This part of the article seems like speculation to me, mainly the part that I bolded. Is there a source that tells us that roxas was referring to the Keyblade? Because I've seen that video many times on youtube (one of the best scenes :D) and some commentors think that roxas was talking about Ansem the Wise. All I'm sayin is, is there any proof that he was indeed talking about the Keyblade?

209.png
KrytenKoro - "That's when we bumped into Hannity. Sean Hannity. See the thing about this dude is, at first he's fair, right? And you're like "Wow!" But then BOOM. The dude's balanced, too. And you're like, HOLY SHIT."
TALK -
Yeah, the fact that he says "he" means it's definitely not the Keyblade. Ansem, Axel, Xemnas, Ventus, or possibly...Xion?

Eh, I guess it would make sense for it to be Ansem/DiZ, considering what we know about how Roxas feels about him. --Neumannz, The Dark Falcon 04:25, February 7, 2011 (UTC)

Just because he says "he" doesn't necessarily mean that he's not talking about the Keyblade. I know that most languages besides English use gender-specific articles on all nouns, and that would likely include the Keyblade if Japanese does that as well. Oathkeeper KH.pngRoxasNobody Oblivion KH.png

It doesn't, at least not in that way. And nothing ever indicates that the Keyblade "chose" Sora. It's unlikely to be Ansem, since he was a blatant racist, so Roxas would know exactly why Ansem picked Sora, and Roxas hated Ansem anyway. It's probably Axel, though - the Organization specifically state that the episode is due to Axel's sacrifice reawakening Roxas within Sora's heart. It's probably due to Axel sacrificing himself for Sora, rather than going forward with his plan to retrieve Roxas out of Sora."We're werewolves, not swearwolves." (KrytenKoro) 23:14, February 7, 2011 (UTC)

Its just a mistranslation in the game.--The Dark Master 23:23, February 7, 2011 (UTC)

@The Dark Master: How do we know? If you read my bubble up there ^^ you'd know that I was asking if there was a source. @Kryten: Ansem could have not wanted Roxas to defeat Xemnas because he doesn't think Roxas's heart is strong enough, same as Xion did. I do see that it might not mean Ansem, since it could be Axel as well. And I see your point. what scene specifically did orgxiii talk about that? Heartless Emblem.png It was impossible to get a conversation going. Everyone was talking too much Heartless Emblem.png 23:57, February 7, 2011 (UTC)

It was the "Where Nothing Gathers" scene after the Roxas battle. I think it was only in KHIIFM."We're werewolves, not swearwolves." (KrytenKoro) 00:28, February 8, 2011 (UTC)
I see. So are we going with Roxas referring to Axel then? Heartless Emblem.png It was impossible to get a conversation going. Everyone was talking too much Heartless Emblem.png 23:40, February 8, 2011 (UTC)

About Roxas' original name

For those editing Roxas's Infobox, do remember that Xemnas used Sora's name to rename the Nobody, not Ventus's. So as to keep the fact that Xemnas named that "Ventus" that way, I edited the Infobox with the Kingdom Hearts 358/2 Days and II Final Mix factual info. And to anyone who delete that bit of true info (which no way the admins I respect will do) are the ones who never played KH358/2 Days before and see the near ending of the opening. Smackdown599 14:33, February 13, 2011 (UTC)

Replica Data and Stats

I don't believe these belong here, as they are on the gameplay page. I tried deleting them and got reverted, are they supposed to be here?--Burgundy 00:11, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

The infobox situation is still complicated. At least for now, assume that it's ok that they're there. --Neumannz, The Dark Falcon 01:59, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Talk with Axel

The scene on Twilight Town after Roxas fought Sora, it felt like a flashback and Axel's sacrifice awakened Roxas. It felt like that was when they had that talk. I want to discuss this before putting it in.Cloudtheavenger (talk) 04:50, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

It's not a flashback, it's happening right then and there. Ultima Spark (talk) Lofty Fantasy KH3D.png 17:52, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

Throwing the Oblivion to Riku

Was it ever explained explicitly? I heard from somewhere it was Xion that made him do it but I was never able to confirm it.Cloudtheavenger (talk) 03:00, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

Don't think so, no.--NinjaSheik 19:50, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

Nomura states that Xion made him do it in one of the Ultimania. I don't remember which one, though."We're werewolves, not swearwolves." (KrytenKoro) 20:08, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

Geez, we need start sourcing these things on the spot. Trying to find the Ultimania interviews are a pain. But I think I found the on you were referring to. It's this one, right? Nomura-sensei is asked, "When Roxas tries to do what Xion has asked of him, Riku hears Xion's voice asking him to stop Roxas. Why?"

The answer he gives is: "First he have to look at things in order. First, the reason why Roxas throws a Keyblade to Riku, and we then see a vision of Xion, is that there is a small remaining part of Xion in Roxas that wants to stop him, and makes him take those actions. The name of the Keyblade that is given to Riku suggests that it has something to do with Xion. Xion wants Roxas to set Kingdom Hearts free, but doesn't want him to face Xemnas right now. She sees that he would most likely lose. So she begs Riku to stop him."--NinjaSheik 23:06, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

Cognitive Functions

Can we say having Ventus's heart enabled him to feel real emotions, which helped improve his cognitive functions?Cloudtheavenger (talk) 05:38, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

Aren't you basing that off of conjecture?--NinjaSheik 23:59, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

In 358/2 Days, Roxas admitted he was basically a zombie the first 7 days, did he not?Cloudtheavenger (talk) 10:09, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

But how do you know it was Ventus's heart that made him feel emotions after those 7 days? TheSilentHero 13:51, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
Cloudtheavenger, you're basing this off your own conjecture, which I know you habit of doing. By the way, if you're going bring this to the talk page first, you shouldn't add information to the article first.--NinjaSheik 23:07, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
I didn't put Ventus's heart making him feel emotions into the article. I put Roxas was a shell in the literal sense because he was basically a zombie because he had no memories beforehand, which was elaborated in the manga, which I was wondering why it was deleted.Cloudtheavenger (talk) 00:25, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
I felt that was out of place. You put it in his Kingdom Hearts section, right? Shouldn't it be more appropriate to put in Days section? Also, where in the manga was this elaborated on? The manga is not canon to the series, and it's pretty silly, so I, for one, don't read it.--NinjaSheik 23:01, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
Oh, did not know that. But that information was regarding the circumstances of his creation, which took place during Kingdom Hearts, which is why I put it there.Cloudtheavenger (talk) 03:57, 25 January 2016 (UTC) Was there anywhere in the canon games that explains why Roxas was a zombie or shell then? The manga and games are quite similar.Cloudtheavenger (talk) 05:54, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
We sometimes put information from the manga on pages in an "Other appearances" section, if they are noteworthy or very different from what happens in the game. However, I don't think this is noteworthy enough to be put on the page. TheSilentHero 18:49, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
Roxas was born with his essence all tangled up with Sora and Kairi, so it's probably just that it took a while (or until Sora got his shape back) for memories to start flowing his way. Roxas keeps getting knocked out later in the game whenever memories are drained away from him, so it's likely that he just took time to "boot up"."We're werewolves, not swearwolves." (KrytenKoro) 20:08, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

Variations

Should Shadow Roxas be added?"We're werewolves, not swearwolves." (KrytenKoro) 15:13, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

Yes. Rex Ronald Rilander (talk) 02:22, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

Emotions

"Unlike other Nobodies, Roxas possesses real emotions, due to his possession of Ventus's heart that stayed with him once he and Sora were separated during Roxas's creation."

The way it's worded really makes it sound like Nobodies are absolutely incapable of emotion, which KH3D debunked. So, that anon that kept changing the article a few days ago really had a point, but just one. Is there no way to reword it to reflect the KH3D reveal? Anime... PAAWAA!!! 23:50, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
He may have had a point, but he was going about it all wrong. (Claiming that the Ultimania was non-canon? What a joke.) Yeah, that first line is more than a little outdated. Not sure how it should be (re)worded though. Rex Ronald Rilander (talk) 05:57, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
Well, I think it just need to be tweaked a little. How about this: "Due to his possession of Ventus's heart that stayed with him once he and Sora were separated during Roxas's creation, Roxas was born with the capability to feel real emotions."? What did KH3D say, exactly, about Nobodies feeling emotions again, though?--NinjaSheik 20:29, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
Luckily I had my 3DS with KH3D in it when I read your post.
Xemnas: "A heart is never lost for good.", "Once born, the heart can also be nurtured. Our experiments creating Heartless were attempts to control the mind, and convince it to renounce its sense of self. But understand, one can banish the heart from the body, but the body will try to replace it the first chance it gets, for as many times as it takes. And so I knew, even after we were divided into Heartless and Nobodies, it was just a temporary seperation.".
Data-Ansem the Wise: "The heart has always been quick to grow. Each exposure to light, to the natural world, to other people, shapes this most malleable part inside of us. Nobodies are not different from us in that manner.".
Also, maybe go with something like "Due to having Ventus's heart inside of him when he was born, Roxas possessed the inate ability to feel emotions." or something. Use "inate" though, I think that'd help. Rex Ronald Rilander (talk) 04:55, 17 December 2016 (UTC)
Definitely the point is using innate, and possibly "unique". The question Nomura was answering was why Roxas felt emotions from the beginning, and had a unique personality, and didn't develop mannerisms based on his original self over time like the other Nobodies. The anon was misunderstanding that distinction, and yeah, the section can be reworded to be clearer about what it's trying to communicate:
  • Roxas started off with strong, non-Sora-based (and non-Xehanort-based!) emotions from his creation. This is due to possessing Ventus's heart.
  • Nobodies recover their emotions over time anyway. This is due to regrowing a heart via connections with others (basically, everything in the KH universe is a bakemono)."We're werewolves, not swearwolves." (KrytenKoro) 15:58, 17 December 2016 (UTC)
So, let's go with what Rex Ronald Rilander proposed: "Due to having Ventus's heart inside of him when he was born, Roxas possessed the innate ability to feel emotions." If there's no objections, I'll add it to the page. :) We should also add a sentence that explains the fact that due to Ventus's heart being born inside and gives him the capability is what separates from other Nobodies, who eventually grow their own hearts over time, for clarification's sake?--NinjaSheik 20:47, 17 December 2016 (UTC)
Just out of curiosity and amusement, was using my full name really nescessary? Rex Ronald Rilander (talk) 03:55, 18 December 2016 (UTC)
Lol! XD I'm being formal, so it's only proper I address with your username. I don't know you very well personally, so it felt inappropriate to address you by a nickname.
In any case, I made the change. I don't really like I worded the last part of the sentence, though. :(--NinjaSheik 20:20, 18 December 2016 (UTC)
Can my first name really be considered a nickname? {He said, more talking to himself than anything.}
Yeah, it doesn't sit quite right with me either. I would have changed it, if I had something better to change it to. Rex Ronald Rilander (talk) 03:44, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
Hmm... I'll have another go at the sentence when I think of something better.--NinjaSheik 22:46, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
Same here. Don't you just hate it when there's something on the tip of your tongue but you just can't put your finger on it? Rex Ronald Rilander (talk) 05:07, 20 December 2016 (UTC)
Yep, yep. Hmm, KrytenKoro tweaked it a bit, but it's still the same. I do feel like there is better way to write it, but I don't have any ideas at the moment. ^_^; I need some time to think about it, and see if I can make it better.--NinjaSheik 20:19, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

Nobody

Is he still a Nobody after the events of KH3? - JTD95 (talk) 12:00, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

Yes, his Heart resides in a Replica, and Replicas are special forms of Nobodies. As It is, his existence came about as a Nobody, and despite growing a Heart of his own, Roxas has still always been considered as such. (Levi657 (talk) 16:57, 8 February 2019 (UTC))
The game say that now Vexen can create Replicas to replicate humans, or to be more correct "they will no more replicate". The game itself say now the Replicas are humans. So all the replicas pre-KH3 are Nobodies, but the replicas of KH3 are humans--93.150.192.195 17:46, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

Promotional Artwork - Older Roxas?

This isn't the first time this conversation got brought up between two users or more (e.g. The picture in the trivia section"), so let's settled this once and for all civilly instead of edit warring. User 71.222.103.177 and KrytenKoro (and maybe a couple more users) have been having this edit war about the promotional artwork where Roxas depicted looking older from how Nomura-sensei typically draws him. Take a look at the old debate and the points addressed. I agree that Roxas does look older, having more mature features as listed in the old debate. And aside from that, the placement of where that info belongs to was brought up, and I think it should belong in the Trivia section instead in the main body of the article.--NinjaSheik 18:06, 3 August 2019 (UTC)

I'm in agreement with Ninja on this one. It's not related to any of the "meat" of the article, it's not ultimately related to the games. His actual appearance drawn before and after is not at all in line with this one, so it doesn't make sense to pretend it was some sort of "early concept art" or anything. Just a random drawing, Nomura choosing to make him out older than usual for no apparent reason. At best, it belongs in Trivia. Diamond Dust Keychain KHFM.pngKeybladeSpyMaster Diamond Dust Keychain KHFM.png 18:16, 3 August 2019 (UTC)
Reading the previous discussion and the comments of the current users involved, both sides make good points. I'm no artist, but whether Roxas looks older or not, whether it was unintentional or intentional on Nomura-sensei's part, is unknown, and as an encyclopedia, we need to remain objective as possible. We need to revisit the topic if the artwork itself is noteworthy to be mentioned at all?--NinjaSheik 18:38, 3 August 2019 (UTC)
This really is all anyone against the inclusion of it is saying. It doesn't work because there's nowhere in any related media suggesting it was ever a thing and I don't understand why it's been a bigger issue than it needs to be. Sometimes a person is drawn off model or different then usual, it doesn't mean it's necessarily something meaningful. The reason I proposed, though, to make it a Trivia entry is because it best fits there. And I'm perfectly willing to just let it stay there, because some people really like the information for reasons I don't understand. To me, as an artist myself, it really does seem like a non-issue, but clearly plenty of people think otherwise. When I went to delete it the first time, I legitimately didn't realize that it was a bigger issue and that people were deleting and then re-adding it, so I didn't mean to start an edit war or add into one. It was only when I actually got a message from the person pretty much saying "no, you're wrong" that I got irritable. However, I will stand by that it doesn't belong in the main body of the article and if it stays there, that's good enough for me.---71.222.103.177 18:46 3 August 2019 (UTC)
In my opinion this really is a non-issue and has no place on this wiki. Whether Roxas looks older or not in that picture is not an objective matter, it’s a subjective one. Nomura does not have one defiended art-style. Roxas on the cover of KH2 looks drastically different from how Roxas appears on the cover of 358/2 Days. We aren’t mentioning Xehanort’s face looking warped on the cover of 2.5 because it’s a stylistic choice. Same with Roxas. - JTD95 (talk) 19:10, 3 August 2019 (UTC)
I agree. The way Roxas looks in the image isn't that different from how he usually looks to warrant a mention on the page. I think we should just move the image to the gallery. TheSilentHero 19:13, 3 August 2019 (UTC)
Agreed. The trivia should be removed and the image goes to Roxas's Gallery, if it isn't there already.--NinjaSheik 19:16, 3 August 2019 (UTC)
It's not trivia because it's covering his appearance in officially published material. The design section is the correct location for that. The design section is not required to focus solely on the games, or the "canon depiction". It's meant for the topic overall, which does include information about the out-universe design process, marketing decisions, and depictions in non-game material.
"We need to revisit the topic if the artwork itself is noteworthy to be mentioned at all?" -- no, we don't. We are not wikipedia, we are the kingdom hearts wiki. Our scope is to cover everything official. If "notability" were a factor in how we cover information, we wouldn't have articles like Mimic or Axe Flapper.
"because some people really like the information for reasons I don't understand." --- quit it with trying to turn things personal. This isn't about "liking" or "not liking" the information, this is about the fact that it's information from an official source, and that wiki policy states to avoid putting information in the trivia section at all times. A staff member should have already corrected you on this behavior.
Furthermore, it's a complete lie that you "don't understand", because I explained the relevant policies for it to you in simple English. That you keep trying to reframe this as some debate about "canon" or whether it was an "accident" doesn't change the relevant policies.
"so I didn't mean to start an edit war" -- then you shouldn't have kept pushing your edit after another editor reverted it and explained the relevant policies. It is inconceivable that you didn't realize that you were making a third revert. Don't blame this on past discussions.
"It doesn't work because there's nowhere in any related media suggesting it was ever a thing" -- what are you even trying to say here? The section is saying that there is a piece of published material where he has a unique appearance. That's it. It's not trying to paint this as evidence for some conspiracy theory.
"Sometimes a person is drawn off model or different then usual, it doesn't mean it's necessarily something meaningful." -- nothing and no one is claiming it's "meaningful". They're claiming it's a fact. Roxas is drawn significantly off-model in a piece of artwork that was itself used in a major way for advertisement. That's worth mentioning -- and the writeup as is even took pains to make it clear that that doesn't "mean" anything. It's just a fact. The wiki reports facts, and leaves it up to the readers to derive any unstated meaning from that.
"so it doesn't make sense to pretend it was some sort of "early concept art" or anything." --- nowhere did this happen.
"In my opinion this really is a non-issue and has no place on this wiki" -- okay, well with all due respect, your opinion is wrong. It's official material, therefore, we cover it. That's the defined scope of the wiki. We cover all official material.
"Roxas on the cover of KH2 looks drastically different from how Roxas appears on the cover of 358/2 Days." -- this is a facile argument. Roxas on the artwork can be directly compared to Ventus, who has been established time and time again as having an identical face to Roxas.
"but whether Roxas looks older or not, whether it was unintentional or intentional on Nomura-sensei's part, is unknown, and as an encyclopedia, we need to remain objective as possible." --- this statement makes no sense. The section wasn't claiming that it was intentional or not. It was claiming that it was there. As far as "whether he looks older or not", you can directly compare him to Ventus in the same image.
"We aren’t mentioning Xehanort’s face looking warped on the cover of 2.5 because it’s a stylistic choice." -- there's no real reason not to (not that I'm really sure what you're talking about -- he has an eyebrow raised). I think the lot of you are quite misunderstanding how the wiki's scope works, or what the design section is for. Alternate styles and depictions, such as Goofy-Riku or Donald-Kairi in KHUX, are fair game. The design and origin sections are both ones in which we cover the topics from an out of universe viewpoint, which means including information that would not be part of the "inner truth" within the setting.
Frankly, as a former admin of this site I'm pretty disappointed in the longtime editors involved in these edits both leaving the protected state of the page on the new, non-consensus-demonstrated version (very irregular), and so blithely ignoring the long-standing, very consensus policy of doing everything possible to keep information from being moved to trivia sections. It has always been wiki policy that it's the obligation of the editor trying to move information to trivia that they show, referencing wiki policies and not their own preferences, that the information more properly belongs there than elsewhere in the article, and achieve consensus in doing so. That absolutely has not happened. It is quite simply shocking that this issue has even gotten to this point, as there are a multitude of wiki policies that should have been followed preventing this."We're werewolves, not swearwolves." (KrytenKoro) 12:37, 5 August 2019 (UTC)