Wikipedia

Talk:Ef: A Fairy Tale of the Two

(Redirected from Talk:Ef: A Fairy Tale of the Two.)
Latest comment: 6 years ago by InternetArchiveBot in topic External links modified
Learn more about this page
Good articleEf: A Fairy Tale of the Two has been listed as one of the Video games good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
December 28, 2007Good article nomineeNot listed
February 15, 2008Good article nomineeListed
Current status: Good article

Heads up, re: title

edit
Latest comment: 16 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

This is a heads up to anyone who wants to know. I've been putting it off ever since I started working on this article a week ago, but now that it's up for GA and I've all but exhausted any more serious additions to the article at this time, I am finally going to get around to the matter with the title. According to Wikipedia:Manual of Style (trademarks)#Trademarks that begin with a lowercase letter: Trademarks rendered without any capitals are always capitalized. For this reason, the title will now be rendered to be "Ef: A Fairy Tale of the Two.". This of course also applies to the titles of the separate games, novels, and anime adaptation.--十八 06:02, 10 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

Kyousuke not voiced in game?

edit
Latest comment: 16 years ago8 comments2 people in discussion

IIRC, he was voiced in the demo. --HashiriyaGDB 06:28, 3 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

I think you mean the First Fan Disc. I played the demo and it only featured Hiro and Miyako (and Kei on the phone).--十八 07:29, 3 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

You sure? Then what's with the part about Kyousuke asking Hiro for one of old paintings? And there was a also a CG where Kei and Chihiro are seen together. BTW, I was playing No Name Losers' translation of the demo.--HashiriyaGDB 04:29, 4 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

Taken from their website (here): This is a standalone product which contains both the ef - the first tale demo and the entire scenario of ef first fandisc, hence the special name. I only played the (original Japanese version) demo, so I have no idea what you're talking about; but I guess I was right about it being in the First Fan Disc.--十八 04:51, 4 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

I think I know what's going on. Kyousuke is voiced only in the HiroxMiya segment of the First Tale. When we're in his point of view during the second acr of the first tale, he's not voiced. --HashiriyaGDB (talk) 07:14, 6 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

Are you positive? Have you played the first tale?--十八 07:29, 6 December 2007 (UTC)Reply
Got my answer here: http://forums.visualnews.net/showpost.php?p=36117&postcount=53 --HashiriyaGDB (talk) 19:28, 7 December 2007 (UTC)Reply
So then working both ways, does this mean that Hiro is voiced in Kyousuke's arc?--十八 11:06, 9 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

Wikipedia:Good article Review

edit
Latest comment: 16 years ago14 comments2 people in discussion

It's clear a lot of work has been put into this article, and it shows. My compliments.

Unfortunately, it's, well, a bit too much. Specifically, it's written more like a description from the company site, rather than a neutral, disinterested view, and ends up being a "teaser" without actually giving much information about the game itself. For example:

  • Development section: we don't need to go into detail about how long each developer has been with the company, or what they are also known for, unless that has a direct bearing on the subject of this article, this game. In other words, if the developer has been working on this game for 10 years, that's important, but if he's been working on other games, that's what the developers' own articles are for. I notice most of them have their own articles.
  • Plot section: seems to describe the lead-ins to each chapter, but not the chapters themselves, as if trying to avoid "giving away" the game. In each section, characters are introduced and ... that's it, really, it doesn't say what they do once they've met. It's also rather long, especially considering how little it actually says. Compare the plot sections in other video game Wikipedia:Featured articles: Voyage: Inspired by Jules Verne#Plot; Halo: Combat Evolved#Plot; Golden Sun#Plot - much shorter, and get to the point, rather than focusing on the lead-in.
  • Characters section: basically repeats the plot section, too long and detailed, and mostly unnecessary. We don't need the characters' background, we need to know how they are used in the game. Compare similar sections in video game FAs.
  • It's all pretty verbose: "sets out with an enthusiastic and serious determination to" how about just "sets out determined to"?
  • "interestingly, Miyako already knows her." - who says it's interesting?
  • "She is the key figure throughout the entire Ef story." - what? Why? In what way?

A few other points that should also be addressed:

  • Every so often, the player will come to a "decision point" - how often? Every five seconds? Every half hour? Every screen? Every 10 screens?
  • Can you "lose", or is the thing basically on rails?
  • animated two-dimensional computer graphics presented from various angles - what is that supposed to mean? When you view something 2-dimensional from a side angle, isn't it like looking down the edge of a sheet of paper?
  • What does "Ef" or "ef" mean? If that can't be answered, it should at least be addressed ("no one knows what Ef means, it's a big secret, the developers have said they won't tell under torture"), and fairly early in the article.
  • What does the adult content consist of? It seems to be important that it's an eroge/hentai game, but what makes it that doesn't seem to be mentioned anywhere.
  • main protagonist/ main heroine - explain. Since it's an eroge, I can sort of guess what that means, but I shouldn't have to. Spell it out.
  • "The show contained thirty-three episodes and was mainly used to promote the visual novels." - promote in what way? Did it follow the plot? Did it give teasers?

I hate to fail an article with so much work put in, but the longest sections need to be rather drastically chopped, researched, and rewritten. --AnonEMouse (squeak) 20:19, 28 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

I have a few things to say about how you reviewed the plot and characters section. First for the characters section, I see that on two out of the three FA articles you linked, they had a small paragraph for the characters section but that is only because they had a main "list of characters" article linked to that section, and that is due to the characaters section being too long. I do not think that the characters section on this article is long enough to warrent a split, so I was merely keeping it in the format it would be in before a split. Not only that, but the characters in a visual novel are the main attraction of the story since before anyone knows anything really about a game, they see the characters and are given a premise and decide if they would want to play it or not. Furthermore, this series has been adaptated into novels, anime, and manga and most of the time WP:ANIME formats the character section in the way I have done it. I may be able to rewrite and contract it, but I'd have to split it off into a separate article since I do not believe anything needs to go as there isn't that much said about each character as it is.
  • You can expound on the characters in a separate article, if you like, but you should concentrate on how the characters are actually used in the subject of the article, in this case, this game. For example, J. R. Rowling recently made a certain splash by saying that she pictured Dumbledore as gay. That is certainly very interesting for the Dumbledore article, but not worth more than a small bit in the Harry Potter article, because it didn't directly play in the plot of those books. Same here - if a certain character detail makes a difference in the game, say so. If it doesn't, we shouldn't fixate on it. --AnonEMouse (squeak) 17:24, 30 December 2007 (UTC)Reply
But, and perhaps you don't realize this, but how the characters are used in the game is directly related to their backgrounds. The "game" is just a long story, so if the backgrounds or individual stories of these characters are not known, the fact that the game is a visual novel loses its reasoning. You don't really use characters in a visual novel as you would perhaps in an RPG game. You can't really use them aside from the actions the player chooses for the protagonist to make, and even then the user has no control of what will happen after that choice is made.--十八 01:58, 31 December 2007 (UTC)Reply
Now about the story and chapters, it wasn't the intention to make them seem like they were trying not to "give away" anything. Actually, the details of these chapters just are not known since this is a Japanese-exlusive game that I doubt many English-speaking people on this Wikipedia or otherwise have played the game and would be able to lend a more specific description of these chapters. And even if they did, wouldn't that be putting a lot of information into an already long section? You're contridicting yourself in that you say this section is already too long, yet you want more information on it. Not only all that, but this story has two parts: The First Tale and The Latter Tale, so it's sensible to separate those two to make it more readable.
  • Er - not known? You mean the game somehow got to be a smash hit without anyone having actually played it? Surely not. And please don't use the "English-speaking" excuse, all the sources of the article are in Japanese, we're either writing the article for the world, and just happening to be writing it in English, in which case "English-speaking" should be irrelevant, or we're writing for English speakers only, in which case the article should be deleted for not having any English sources. :-) (I favor the former, but you certainly can't have it both ways.) --AnonEMouse (squeak) 17:24, 30 December 2007 (UTC)Reply
I wouldn't call this a "smash hit" game, but it did garner at least some notability for it to be made into an anime. I'm just saying that reliable secondary sources of people who have played the first game are not readily avaiable since this is a visual novel. Even if this game did get reviewed in magazines like Comptiq, Dengeki G's Magazine, Dengeki Hime, or the recent Dengeki G's Festival! Deluxe, I do not have access to these magazines so I cannot get the reviews I want. And I highly doubt that aside from Japanese bloggers that have played this game, there are not many other real indepth reviews in terms of what can be readily found on the Internet. So we just have to work with what can be obtained, and as far as what is outlined at WP:GA?, I do not believe that there is anything on there that says you have to go into a lot of detail which would come up for a Featured Article.--十八 01:58, 31 December 2007 (UTC)Reply
animated two-dimensional computer graphics presented from various angles - what is that supposed to mean? When you view something 2-dimensional from a side angle, isn't it like looking down the edge of a sheet of paper? - Did it say you were going to view it from a side angle? Yes, they are 2-D images, but are viewed not straight on but from akward angles, as if you were watching a movie and the cinamatographer wanted different angles for different scenes, but you still see all that's being presented. I guess I'll be more specific about this, but I thought it was already clear what it meant.
Haven't you ever seen a sytlstic movie before? Hell, forget that, just watch one episode of this series' anime. It's unconventional in it's presentation of visuals, and compared to normal visual novels, it's very unconventional since visual novels have had pretty much the same format for over 10 years. I have tried as well as I can to explain this difference in the article, and I do not believe I am being unclear at all.--十八 01:58, 31 December 2007 (UTC)Reply
What does "Ef" or "ef" mean? If that can't be answered, it should at least be addressed ("no one knows what Ef means, it's a big secret, the developers have said they won't tell under torture"), and fairly early in the article. - This is something I definitely do not agree on. Yes, what "ef" means is not known, but I was under the impression that we should only write about content we actually know rather than what we do not. You can write an entire article about things you don't know, but it's the content that is real and verifiable that's going to help anyone. So since we don't know what it means, we don't say we don't know. It might not even mean anything at all. Merely implying that it means something is original research, thus we couldn't even say that it means something without a reference from the company saying that it really did mean something.
  • When I read the article, this stood out as a glaring hole. "Fairy tale" and maybe even "two" make sense, but "Ef" begs for an explanation. Surely at least one game reviewer or developer interviewer somewhere had the same question. --AnonEMouse (squeak) 17:24, 30 December 2007 (UTC)Reply
A glaring hole perhaps, but I have not found any such interviews where Minori said that "ef" stood for anything. So aside from going into original research, nothing will be said about it until something is found that says "ef" does indeed stand for something. Titles don't always have to make sense, and with my experience in Japanese media, it tends to happen at least some of the time. Case in point, with the visual novel H2O: Footprints in the Sand, I once read a review which stated that the game had absolutely nothing to do with water, yet it was entitled H2O. The reviewer was baffled why this was so. So please, do not assume "ef" means something; it's much easier to assume it doesn't mean anything at all.--十八 01:58, 31 December 2007 (UTC)Reply
Everything else in your review I can at least see where you're coming from and can follow your suggestions well enough. It's just these points above that I've addressed that I would like if you replyed on.--十八 01:19, 29 December 2007 (UTC)Reply
Pending your comments, I will add that I believe I have dealt with most of what you have outlined, though I still disagree with you on the points regarding the Development, Plot, and Characters sections, and I have had other articles I have worked on the past that I was able to get up to GA status with much the same format, though I must admit that this one is a bit more unique due to the distribution in the Story between the two Tales and then the sub chapters in each Tale. However, some of this information just is not available due to restrictions of not having the game available, and if you're going to fail this on points on WP:GA?, I'd assume you'd go to points 1(a) and 3(b), though I do not believe this prose is unclear, and I also do not believe it goes into unnecessary details. As for all the other points on WP:GA?, I do not believe any of them would apply to this current article as it complies with the manual of style, provides many good references, contains no original research that I can see, or that at least couldn't be readily referenced, it addresses the major aspects of the games and adaptations that spawned from them, it is neutral, it is stable, and it contains images that are taged with fair use rationales and are appropriate to the topic. So, seeing as you already failed the article despite it being on GAC for over a month and a half, I'm going to renominate it and get a second opinion.--十八 06:50, 29 December 2007 (UTC)Reply
I looked at the article again - you haven't dealt with most of my comments. How is it an Eroge? What is the actual plot? The Characters and Plot sections still repeat each other. How often are decisions made? How long is the game? Your justification seems to be that since you don't have access to the game or reviews, that means you can't do a better job. Well, that's not good enough - we're not reviewing this from the point of view "this is the best article that Juhachi can write", we're reviewing this from the point of view "this is a good article on the subject," regardless of author. If the former were true, I could write half a dozen FAs on nuclear physics, each saying "I don't know much about this subject, so this is the best article I could write." --AnonEMouse (squeak) 17:16, 1 January 2008 (UTC)Reply
I'm seriously beginning to think you didn't even look at my additions. I have already answered how it's an eroge, how often decisions are made (on average, as it's a variable quantity no matter what game you play), and you did not originally ask how long the game is (and I do not believe that can be accurately defined). Look in the expanded gameplay section. It specifically states that there are sex scenes in the game between the protagonists and the heroines. If that doesn't define how it's an eroge, then I don't know what does! Furthermore, I must again ask you to stick to what is at WP:GA? and judge this article on those critera. And as for the repetition in the plot and characters, aside from combining both sections in a single "Plot and characters" section by plugging in the character info into the story section (and thus removing all redundancy), there is no way around this. The plot is meant to describe the story, and the characters section describes the characters and sometimes you have to bring in some plot info for context. Again, this is a story driven game, so without bringing in plot, there really is not much left to say.
As for "what is the actual plot?", I do not think I have to tell you that it would be very difficult to write an overall plot for four separate stories, plus intermissions by Yuko and Yu. Even if I did have full info on all four plot lines, I do not believe it would make sense to go into so much detail unless you want me to bloat the article on plot info. As such, there does not seem to be any all-encompassing plot, though without the second game released, this cannot be known anyway at this time.--十八 18:59, 1 January 2008 (UTC)Reply

(unindent) Ah, you want chapter and verse. OK, per WP:GA? my issues were with 

3 It is broad in its coverage. In this respect, it:
   (a) addresses the major aspects of the topic;[3] and
   (b) stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary details (see summary style).

It is not, neither a nor b. As I wrote above, the article focuses on unnecessary character details outside the main plot, and does not address the actual plot, a rather major aspect of the topic. You write giving four plots would bloat the article, yet you don't hesitate writing trivialities such as that Mizuki is on the girl's basketball team in two different places, without connecting it with any plot. And how much plot could there be if the article itself says "the game's overall story is not that long"? How long is "not that long", anyway? 

4 It is neutral; that is, it represents viewpoints fairly and without bias.

It is not. As I wrote above, the article is written as a "teaser", as if it were attempting to entice the reader into playing the game in order to find out the real substance.

As for the one sentence you write about it being an eroge, that would seem to be uncited, which would violate #2. The nearest reference link to it, http://homepage2.nifty.com/aozaki/log_2006_12.htm#20061202 goes to a "not found" page. And are you quite sure that it's just main character with main heroine, not with half a dozen others along the way? I could also mention that the plot section covers three chapters, while Shiuchi and Muziki seem to be from a fourth chapter, what happened to that one?

But I'm done now, I see you renominated it at WP:GA, possibly you will find a different reviewer more to your taste there. --AnonEMouse (squeak) 16:07, 2 January 2008 (UTC)Reply

Ef

edit
Latest comment: 16 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion

Any idea what "Ef" means in context with the game? Wiktionary:ef has a few entries; does the series happen to take place in Iceland or Wales? Is it a weird English pun? e.g. ef→F→Fairy (tale). I've done some searching and I can't come up with an answer. May border on OR, but does anyone have a clue? It's been buggin' me.--SeizureDog (talk) 07:06, 30 January 2008 (UTC)Reply

If you scanned the above GA review, you'll see it come up a couple times. I stated in the review how "ef" doesn't have to mean anything, and could just be there for kicks, and if it really does mean something, then we have no idea what it means. The point is, until we know for sure that it means something, it'd be OR to assume it does mean something, which is why it isn't stated in the article if it stands for anything or not.
Anyway, I don't really have a take on it myself. The game is meant to be set in a Germanic type setting, as there was mention of a trip to Germany for information gathering in the article. There are multiple possibilities to a meaning though, your example being only one. Notice that the visual novel's theme song is named "Yūkyū no Tsubasa", and the single that the song was released on used the song's title translated into English as "Eternal Feather", and then the anime's opening theme is "Euphoric field", though that was probably just to make a connection back to "ef". And if you really want to get deep, "ef" could just be the first letter F for any number of words, Fairy (tale) being only one of them. I seem to remember seeing symbolism of flying and feathers in the anime version, and you could also talk about fate, or fear, or free; there's too many possibilities.--十八 08:26, 30 January 2008 (UTC)Reply
It seems like something that would be bound to come up in an interview though. Perhaps the artbook has something to that effect, though I'm having trouble tracking a copy down.--SeizureDog (talk) 12:20, 30 January 2008 (UTC)Reply
Reading the ef - a tale of melodies. broadcasting commemoration report there's this quote.

この後、「『ef』は誰が考えたんですか?」という質問に酒井さんは自分で考えたと答え、最初は「eternal feather」「ever forever」の2つのみで、他は後付けということを言っていました。

nbkz pretty much said himself that ef, at first, stands for eternal feather and ever forever, though they've decided to add another meanings (possibly emotional flutter, euphoric field and ebullient future) later. Though I don't think we can use that as a source because WP:SPS. —29th ((☎)) 07:56, 30 September 2008 (UTC)Reply

Wikipedia: Good article review (2)

edit
Latest comment: 16 years ago7 comments2 people in discussion

Note: Article originally failed criteria three. Changes to article fixed the problem and as such, I recommended it. -- Nomader (Talk) 03:16, 16 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose):   b (MoS):  
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references):   b (citations to reliable sources):   c (OR):  
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects):   b (focused):  
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:  
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars etc.:  
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):   b (appropriate use with suitable captions):  
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:  

Below is the reasoning for the hold in the article (due to criteria 3).

  • Gameplay: This section was for the most part, well written (and although not-well sourced, I'll still accept it). Job well done.
  • Development: We don't need to know how long the developer's been in his position. This is an article about the game, not about the man himself. Cut most of the stuff regarding the developer. The same goes for the information about the writer and the director. The additional information about the creators of the game have improved the development section sufficiently.
  • Plot: There's too much here for just one point, so I'll be resorting to bullets. Re-formatting of the article makes it much easier to read, and though there are some minor flaws in formatting, they're easily fixed. Extraneous information has either been removed or incorporated seamlessly into the plot summary.
  • Ef: The First Tale.
  • The plots end sort of abruptly -- no ending is ever provided in the plot summary. If it's going to be a full summary, no matter the spoiler cost, the full plot needs to be included (excluding sub-plots and un-important developments -- more on that later) No ending for the second part is explained in that the game is still not yet released (my mistake).
*First and second chapters: Kei develops into a love triangle. Then...? Again, the plot is left open. Endings added into plot summary.
  • Ef: The Latter Tale.
  • The collaboration for the story is left un-finished. The reader of the article will never learn whether or not Chihiro will ever finish her story -- it's slowly looking like a teaser for the game (I'm thinking about re-rating the game above as non-NPOV. I'm sorry for this comment -- I think I was just getting frustrated last night with all the minor problems in this article adding up to a large mess. Now that the characters section has been incorporated into the plot, it reads easier and works a lot better.
  • Characters: You're repeating things in the two sections -- I'd almost suggest merging them together somehow, and noting the characters progression from storyline to storyline (if possible -- otherwise, this repeating needs to stop).
  • The mention of the "star basketball player" for Kei and Mizuki is non-essential and should be cut.
  • The Miyako section repeats the bike storyline from the plot section.
  • The reading preferences of the characters is not important (Mizuki), and nor is the instrumental violin playing (Shuichi). Small plot details that might be interesting in the game are only important enough for a mention if that's what defines the character (as in, if Shuichi is drawn with a violin always over his shoulder). The Characters section has been eliminated (and rightly so).

For now, I'm listing this article on hold for seven days. If the problems listed above are not fixed by that time, I will have to regrettably fail the article... which is a shame. It really does show that someone's put time into it -- good luck. -- Nomader (Talk) 05:43, 15 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

I rewrote the entire plot section by consolidating the character information into the story sections to remove the redundancy, but I don't agree with the last point you made about the tiny details. Many of these details were lifted from the official website and are sourced to express this, and if the creators thought it was good enough to mention in the official character descriptions that Mizuki loves reading shōjo manga, or that Shuichi is a professional violinist, then it's probably going to be important for their stories or at least for their base characters. These tiny little details gives the reader an idea of who these characters are, and seeing as how there's rather limited information when it comes to the fourth chapter and the main characters in it (since the second game hasn't been released yet), there's not much else that can be done at this point. If that means that this article cannot be GA until only after the second game comes out and more information for both the third and fourth chapters is divulged then I guess it can't be helped, but I'd like to know if this article has a chance to get to GA before the second game comes out.
And the plots were not trying to be teasers, just some of the more detailed information has yet to surface, such as having the second game still unreleased. Other than all that, I've also updated the development section per your suggestions, and await your reply.--十八 09:04, 15 February 2008 (UTC)Reply
The changes have vastly improved the article's overall quality. Seeing the smaller details I criticized previously as extraneous information in the light of the plot section and integrated into a seamless article makes them fit in quite nicely -- I take back what I said about the small details. And the development section is wholly improved with the removal of actual extraneous information -- good work. (I've edited my notes above, noted starch improvement in the article)
I apologize for not noting the release date of the second game. I'd recommend that you insert Template:Future game somewhere into the article (whether at the beginning of the article or at the beginning of the plot section regarding the latter tale). It's possible for articles about video games to be un-released and achieve good article status, but after the game comes out, the article could be put under reassessment and be removed.
I am curious about the lack of sources regarding the game's adult content -- is there anything anywhere from a reliable source that states the game is classified as "eroge"? Also, I'm wary about the fourth chapter -- it's just Shuichi's character profile from before pasted into the section. However, it's acceptable if there are no other sources regarding that section of the game out yet... but when the game does come out, it should be updated as promptly as possible with sources.
Anyways, I'll be recommending Ef: A Fairy Tale of the Two. for Good Article status sometime tonight -- if the above (few) concerns are fixed or answered. -- Nomader (Talk) 21:04, 15 February 2008 (UTC)Reply
At the official website, both games are classified as "interactive novels" which are prohibited from being sold to anyone who is less than 18 years old, which signifies that the game carries adult content, and thus is an eroge. Other sites like Getchu or Amazon carry similar notices of the adult content. I guess I'll reference the official website if you want me to.--十八 23:31, 15 February 2008 (UTC)Reply
I think it would be best if you had at least something referencing it -- the official site should do. I think that does it though for all the fixes -- thanks for adding the template to the game. I'll check back here in May (if I'm around here when the game comes out) to see how the article's being updated. Until then, I'm listing the article for GA. Good work! -- Nomader (Talk) 03:16, 16 February 2008 (UTC)Reply
The game comes out at the end of May, so by the end of June (at the latest) there should be enough information to compile for the underdeveloped story sections. Thank you for the review and promotion.--十八 04:51, 16 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

Harem??? I don't think so...

edit
Latest comment: 16 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I can't see any signs of a 'harem' in this game.. There's four girls who get paired up with four guys.. The closest thing to a 'harem' is the slight love triangle enjoyed by Hirono. And you don't get a choice either.. The only reason this is classified a harem is because it's a visual novel, many of which are or contain some form of a harem in it. Since I do not know how to change things very well on wiki, someone else should do it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rathalos09 (talk • contribs) 02:48, 17 September 2008 (UTC)Reply

The mysterious Opening BGM for the first episode?

edit
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I quote from wikipedia

"The first episode used a background music track for the opening theme, and the second and tenth episodes had no opening theme"

Was there an official name for the BGM released? Flowright138 (talk) 09:58, 9 July 2010 (UTC)Reply

Fourth chapter

edit
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hi there :) I've got some questions about ef. As Ef: a fairy tale of the two has been rated GA article, we're trying to translate it in french. I try to proofread the translation, but I know nothing at all about ef. I have trouble translating «Kuze keeps to himself that he is dying of a special case of neurosis». Firstly because of «dying of neurosis» (It's an idiom? I don't get the point of dying of psychological disease) and secondly because ANN talks about «fatal illness», that seems to fit better with the background. So, is there someone who know the story and can tell me more about that poor Kuze? ;) Thanks in advance!

(Damn, my written english is really bad, I'm sorry...). -- From FR WikiProject Manga and Anime, Hilanna (talk) 16:43, 6 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

Cleanup (Jul 26 2011)

edit
Latest comment: 13 years ago9 comments2 people in discussion

I have made a number of significant changes to the article.

1) There are two paragraphs where it explains that the choices the player makes eventually leads to sexual intercourse. This is unneeded, as the first paragraph explicitly states that it's an adult visual novel. A first-person shooter or a sidescroller wouldn't have several paragraphs explaining what the genre is. The gameplay section has been reduced to what makes Ef different than other visual novels. I can't help but think the original contributor had a bias against sexual content when writing this article.

2) According to [[1]] it is okay to show original styling of the title once. I have done so. However, the period at the end of the Ef titles is nonstandard, and so I have removed most, if not all of them from the article. Some may still remain. To compensate, I've changed the infobar to include the original styling.

3) The second paragraph has been greatly shortened since most of it was technical info (Do we really need to know the author and publisher of the manga in the beginning summary? This information is included later in the article.)

4) I have removed non-neutral sentences, such as claims that the visual novel isn't long or that there are over a thousand CGs. If there's no source, this information can't be included. Apparently, when both parts of the visual novel are combined, the length is similar to that of other standard-sized visual novels, anyhow. Samwise04 (talk) 16:00, 26 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

First of all, you may not be familiar with certain Wikipedia guidelines yet. Per WP:LEAD, the lead of the article is meant to be a summary of the entire article, so obviously it's going to have pertinent information that the rest of the article carries, including the gameplay and the various adaptations. The gameplay section is the length that it is because you have to describe what you do in this game. You can't just say "The gameplay follows that of a typical visual novel, but character pairings are pre-determined." because no one will understand what you're talking about if they don't know what a visual novel is. All of this was reviewed and approved when the article passed GA back in 2008, and while I'm not saying the article can't still be improved, I am saying that your edits have reduced it in quality, at least when it comes to the lead and gameplay sections. Look at other GA or FA video game articles to see how long their leads and gameplay sections are. On your second point, yeah the original styling can be shown once, but everywhere else (including the infobox), it should be the standard capitalization used on Wikipedia. On your third point, again, the purpose of the lead is supposed to summarize the article, so of course it's going to be repetitive with info already in the article. But okay, it could be shortened some, but not to the extent you went at it. You're right to remove claims without sources, so I have no problem with that.--十八 21:00, 26 July 2011 (UTC)Reply
I have read WP:LEAD and came to the conclusion that the original lead was too long. The ef lead is even longer than that of Starcraft 2, which is a GA and has much more information to justify its longer lead. The current lead has enough information in a nutshell: the visual novel, the manga, the light novel, and the anime. Including things such as which publishing company publishes a magazine is highly irrelevant when it comes to the overall picture. The lead is supposed be a capsule summary, not a bed of narrow information. It is enough to simply state that a manga was serialized in a magazine, but you insist that the artist and the publishing company must be included as well.
The gameplay section should only cover elements of the game that make it unique, and not be an overview of most visual novels. Even though visual novels are a niche subject, they cannot be given preferential treatment over the more traditional gaming genres. The Starcraft 2 article does not explain what a real-time strategy game is. Neither does Bioshock for first-person shooters, which is a FA. Explaining things such as reading text on the screen and making decisions at times is typical of almost every visual novel, so it shouldn't be included. Instead, focus on the parts that make ef special, such as its CG content or animated stills.
In addition, you keep insisting to put in the term "sexual intercourse" as though this is a defining part of its gameplay. This part of the visual novel probably makes up less than 5% of the story, so by emphasizing it beyond "adult visual novel" you are violating WP:NPOV by giving it undue weight. In addition, the climax of Ef is not the sexual intercourse itself, but rather the resolution of the overall story, which does not involve sexual content. The tone in which this part is written suggests that the game is a sex romp, which it is not.
I see you have reverted many of my changes, including the information where the game has been licensed by Mangagamer, which has credible sources (the company site and animenewsnetwork). I know you worked on this article a lot, but it seems you worked on it up to the point where it got a bare GA pass from someone, so now you believe the previous version of the article is sound. I must remind you that all edits are assumed to be in good faith, and that no one person owns a Wikipedia article. This article needs much more improvement as both the game and the anime get ready for a western release. If you must go into a revert war with me, then this article will lose GA status until we can reach a consensus. For now, I hope WP:BOLD is enough. Samwise04 (talk) 23:42, 26 July 2011 (UTC)Reply
For now I've shortened the lead to what it was before, but I have kept the gameplay section intact, since you strongly disagreed there. Hopefully this is a good first compromise until we can reach a consensus. Samwise04 (talk) 00:18, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply
Regardless, one of the requirements to get this to GA was to describe, in detail, what a visual novel is. I've worked on a bunch visual novel articles and gotten them up to GA, so it's not like this is something only applicable to this article. Visual novels don't really have "gameplay" in the traditional sense, since there's so little player interaction. Also, IIRC, the GA reviewer wanted the article to describe what makes it an "adult" game, since merely mentioning it in the lead was not sufficient. And anyway, that only gets a small sentence in the gameplay section: "...which ultimately leads to scenes where the given protagonist has sexual intercourse", so I can't see why you'd say the article is putting undue weight on it. It being an adult game is one of the things that sets it apart from other games, so obviously it needs at least one sentence to describe why it is considered adult in content. Anyway, your 2-line gameplay was merely too small, and any GA reviewer would request to put in more content if it was left. I tried to reduce the gameplay some, so it's no so wordy.
I still think the lead needs more content, at the very least the manga's transfer to Dengeki Daioh and how many episodes were in both anime. Also, I missed the Mangagamer lead note, so that's fine, and I'll add in a note about the licensing of the anime, if you think that's not going too far.--十八 02:46, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply
Putting in which ultimately leads to scenes where the given protagonist has sexual intercourse is still violating WP:NPOV, and is not entirely correct, since a number of adult scenes in the visual novel do NOT involve sexual intercourse. The GA reviewer is in the wrong here, and shouldn't have recommended that you put in that blurb. What if, in every video game with a modicum of violence, it said which ultimately leads to scenes where the player engages in violent acts? Also, the statement of sexual content isn't true for all versions of the visual novel. The PlayStation 2 version has no sexual content whatsoever. Therefore, either the sexual content blurb must be removed, or it must be explicitly stated that only the PC version has sexual content and not the PlayStation 2 version. Alternatively, since only the PC visual novel is adult in nature and not any of the other media (anime, manga, light novel), the lead could be rewritten to state that Ef is a media franchise with a visual novel, in which the PC version is adult and the PlayStation 2 version is not. Once we discuss this further, we should decide on how to edit this. Samwise04 (talk) 15:35, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply
It's Wikipedia convention to write the article (and the lead) based around the media that came first, in this case the adult visual novel. That's why it is introduced as an adult visual novel, and then later mentioned that it received ports and adaptations. But okay, the sentence about sexual content can be rewritten, but in no way should it be entirely removed, since that would be ignoring an aspect of the gameplay, however small, that sets it apart from other games (your words). Instead of the word sex, we could use pornographic, for instance. So then how's this: "Each protagonist is paired with a heroine, and each scenario in the original PC versions of the games includes pornographic scenes between the given protagonist and give heroine. These scenes were later removed from the PlayStation 2 port."--十八 20:23, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply
That's still WP:NPOV and false information. The visual novel has five scenes that are sexual in nature but are not pornographic: 1) First Kei sex scene, 2) Miyako in bed 3) Mizuki's dream 4) Shūichi's attempted rape 5) Nagi in the art room. All five of these elevate the game to adult status, and all five are heavily modified in the PlayStation 2 port. I would rather try ...each chapter in the original PC version of the visual novel includes scenes with sexual content. These scenes are removed or modified in the PlayStation 2 port. This is correct and as neutral as possible because it doesn't emphasize the scenes that are sexually explicit.
Actually, allow me to be anal and cite WP:NOR and WP:V. Unless you find a source that explicitly states that there are pornographic scenes in Ef, you cannot include that term in the article. Note that it must use that exact term if you're citing a Japanese source: erotic/h-scene/18+ is NOT necessarily pornographic. Therefore, my suggestion actually makes sense because it can be referenced to minori's own web site. They have an 18+ disclaimer on their front page, thus presenting itself as an adult site. However, this warning does NOT implicitly warn about pornographic scenes in their works. Samwise04 (talk) 00:03, 28 July 2011 (UTC)Reply
Okay, that wording works. I'll edit the section now.--十八 10:07, 28 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

Setting

edit
Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I feel like the Plot section should mention where the stories take place, as this absolutely _central_ to the events portrayed (e.g., past earthquake, separation of the twins, Christmas themes, Yu's architecture, etc.) and their meaning to the characters' relationships (e.g., scars of past tragedies, the twins being mirror images like their twin cities, summer representing the future, etc. etc.).

However I'm a little confused on the setting. In the anime, stories drawn from "The First Tale" primarily take place in Japan, while the stories taken from "The Latter Tale" primarily occur in Australia (this was not entirely clear at first... at least to me). Is that true for the visual novels as well? Elsewhere on this Talk page, someone mentioned "a Germanic setting," and indeed, the "Tale of Melodies" anime is overflowing with German language imagery. But there was no attempt to explain this, as far as I could tell -- the anime never drew Germany into the plot. So, do the visual novels have the same Japan/Australia twin cities setting, or is it possibly in Germany or additional locations?? 174.63.85.80 (talk) 12:27, 2 February 2012 (UTC)Reply

Requested move 21 December 2016

edit
Latest comment: 7 years ago6 comments6 people in discussion
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Moved (non-admin closure) Fuortu (talk) 16:24, 28 December 2016 (UTC)Reply

Ef: A Fairy Tale of the Two. → Ef: A Fairy Tale of the Two – We don't normally have a period at the end of the Title. The Mysterious El Willstro (talk) 03:51, 21 December 2016 (UTC)Reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
edit
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 12 external links on Ef: A Fairy Tale of the Two.. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:03, 21 December 2016 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 15 external links on Ef: A Fairy Tale of the Two. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:49, 18 September 2017 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Ef: A Fairy Tale of the Two. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:07, 10 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Ef:_A_Fairy_Tale_of_the_Two&oldid=1196529197"