Talk:Phoenix Wright

Phoenix Wright's Age?

How can Wright be 24 if he was born in 1992?

The games take place in the future.ShaleZero 20:13, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Verification Needed

OBJECTION!

"During production, someone suggested "Souka Naruhodo" (which translates to "Oh, yes, I see now") as a name, but that was quickly struck down by higher members of the staff, settling for simply Naruhodo instead."

This quote was found in the main passage of the article. Can anyone tell me the source article we can verify this from? hmm? 69.144.184.243 08:53, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

If memory serves me, it was spoken in the court records fan site, I don't know if it was sourced their. It was most likely in one of the books for the game that came out in japan.74.71.78.251 02:32, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Broken ref

The second ref (capcom.co.jp) directs to HTTP 404. --Mika1h (talk) 23:03, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

It's an archived link (which works fine). The original is broken.--_{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 23:25, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

It wasn't an archived link when I posted the comment... --Mika1h (talk) 13:09, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Apparently Kung Fu Man fixed it before I got here.--_{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 20:47, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Was this confirmed?

"Phoenix invents the MASON System, a fictional evidence overview program that allows "jurists" (jurors) to view the events of the case."

Was this actually confirmed anywhere? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.106.74.119 (talk) 11:53, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

It doesn't say anywhere in the game that he invented it, so I changed it to "used" instead.--_{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 22:23, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: No Consensus to perform a move. Taelus (talk) 13:37, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

---

Phoenix Wright (character) → Phoenix Wright — The character's name is Phoenix Wright whereas the game is not. Thus the character's page should be "Phoenix Wright" and "Phoenix Wright" should not redirect to the first game's page. Similar to how Indiana Jones refers to the character and not the series. KiasuKiasiMan (talk) 12:04, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

The first game shorthand, the mangas shorthand, and the series shorthand all share the name. It's a pretty loose comparison to Indie; Indiana Jones is a cultural icon who has starred in movies, video games, comic books, and television shows. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 22:20, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Since the first game was titled Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney, it's more likely people are looking for the game than the character. That's the reason there are "blah blah blah redirects here..." templates.--_{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 02:12, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

Spoiler warning?

I propose that the section with info about the games be fitted with a spoiler warning for those wanting to read about the character without having the plot of the games spoiled for them. I fell victim to this myself. 78.157.124.160 (talk) 18:51, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Heads up re Ult. MvC3 rumors

Pretty strong evidence - but no RS or official word - that Phoenix will be playable in Ultimate MvC 3. Keep eyes out for rumored sourcing --MASEM (t) 18:20, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Expanding the reception section

Now that Ace Attorney has obtained an anime, Phoenix Wright's reception section could be expanded with his role in it. I recommend Anime News Network and Fandom Post. I hope this will help.Tintor2 (talk) 23:26, 13 April 2016 (UT

This might help [1] Tintor2 (talk) 15:48, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

The Layton crossover

The Layton crossover should be mentioned of course, but I don't think that should be done by describing its plot in the middle of the main plot, because that suggests that it actually happened in-universe, which it didn't. Also, if I remember correctly, the crossover could theoretically take place anytime between the ending of the first game and Phoenix's disbarment, and the way it is described currently suggests a really narrow time frame. Maybe it would be best to give it its own paragraph, and specify that while this game does exist, it is not canon in-universe and does not happen in the main story line. Zwanzigzwanzigg (talk) 08:48, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

@Zwanzigzwanzigg: Godot and the events of Trials and Tribulations are briefly mentioned in the crossover in the past tense, placing the game as being set between Trials and Tribulations and Phoenix's disbarment (two months later, in the fourth game), that is correct. The background cameos Phoenix and Maya make in both Investigations games (exploring the world two weeks to a month after the third game) also fit with this timelime. It is narrow though, I agree. The problem with the crossover is that it is considered canon to the Professor Layton series according the official encyclopaedia for the series, fitting neatly between the events of Curious Village and Unwound Future. While Takumi was translated as saying the game was "set in a parallel world that is unique to Layton Kyōju VS Gyatuten Saiban" in an interview, and a lot of people interpreted this as him saying it was non-canon to the Ace Attorney series, it does seem that he is just referencing the game being set in Labyrinthia, which at first is presented as a medieval parallel world filled with witch trials, the characters themselves calling it a "parallel world" throughout the game before finding out the truth. Rxoichi (talk) 12:48, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

I haven't played the crossover yet, so I don't know what the parallel worlds in the game are like, but in my opinion it doesn't really make sense to put the plot of the crossover between T&T and AJ, because maybe it would happen there timeline wise, but it doesn't take place at the same location as all the other games. If we put it there, it disrupts the retelling of the main story line, because it has nothing to do with it. While it should definitely be in there, I think it would be best to add a paragraph after the retelling of the main story line so it's not as disruptive, and it can be given more context as well, like explaining the parallel universe it is set in. Zwanzigzwanzigg (talk) 00:30, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

Right, the twist in the game is that the "parallel world" turns out to be a British government-approved social experiment like the one in M. Night Shyamalan's The Village. The game is very much canon, with its jury trial system carrying on to the The Great Ace Attorney prequel games, and the 20th anniversary art for the series including its characters. It can simply be mentioned in-between the Trials and Tribulations and Apollo Justice: Ace Attorney summaries as "Phoenix and Maya travel to Britain, get into an adventure, and then go home." Rxoichi (talk) 16:20, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

• Checkuser note Rxoichi has been blocked as a  Confirmed sock.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 19:30, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 February 2023

Add the words "though this has never been confirmed" at the very end of the first paragraph in the "Reception" section. Because Phoenix Wright is never confirmed to be bisexual. HeroShark96 (talk) 06:47, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{Edit semi-protected}} template. This does not seem to be a necessary addition, as the current prose does not describe it as a confirmed fact, rather as a popular interpretation in the fan community. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 11:59, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Without that clarification, the prose can come off as misleading. Especially when the article cited makes a lot of assumptions about the game's characters that aren't confirmed. The interpretation you mention is not a general consensus, since not everyone holds this interpretation. Then again, this is about the character, his creation, and confirmed facts. So an unconfirmed interpretation about a character's sexuality doesn't seem like a necessary thing to add to the article. HeroShark96 (talk) 04:52, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

While you refuse to make any fixes, be aware that the article contains a several non sequiturs. Such as stating that Phoenix Wright adopting a girl is proof of bisexuality, and saying he's bisexual when the "Significant Others" list in his article consists entirely of women. Preventing people from editing this page for seemingly no reason makes it seem as if you don't want people correcting information like this. HeroShark96 (talk) 06:03, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

History of socking on this article

Hi, Tintor2! You asked in the edit summary of Special:Diff/1230632707 why the IP editor removed the San Francisco Chronicle's characterization of Phoenix and Edgeworth's relationship. After literal years, plural, I'm tempted to say that unlike with the main Ace Attorney article, the Phoenix/Edgeworth removal here is mainly the work of a persistent sock. There's no consensus for its exclusion.

After first putting that info there back in 2021, I let the rewrite omitting Edgeworth stand because I thought the person(s) who'd contested it were doing so in good faith. But as the years (!) passed, I started noticing many users under some kind of sock block show up in the article history (the latest one as of this comment is the IP editor of Special:Diff/1221348919; it would be tedious to track any IP ones may have expired but the registered user blocks that remain include editor(s) of Special:Diff/1186632389 and Special:Diff/1147544827). One sock even shows up on this very talk page in the #The Layton Crossover above; their edit summary at Special:Diff/1087186007 reminds me of the one of the IP who re-removed the Phoenix-Edgeworth statement at Special:Diff/1230650382 (disclaiming that they're fans of the ship, implying the article can only include info from official canon; at the risk of speaking distastefully, that last part matches the stale WP:SPA of #Semi-protected edit request on 15 February 2023 above).

I suspect a similar situation at Miles Edgeworth; my initial addition at Special:Diff/1027666750 of Phoenix by name has since been removed. There is less edit history, which means the list of blocked socks apparent in this article's history is not so there.

As for the most recent removal, I'm not sure what the best way to resolve the conflict is. If you have ideas, I'm all ears. Thanks for reading this whole thing, Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 05:23, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

I didnt edit Edgeworth so I had no idea. What kinda bothers me is the tagging and running of this article when most articles primarily Focus on the character rather than reviews. Tintor2 (talk) 08:33, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, not a fan of the drive-by tagging either (diff by 192.155.107.118 (talk) for future reference). You and several othets put in work to improve and expand the article; IP put no specific explanation here or in the edit summary. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 08:48, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

About Phoenix and Edgeworth relationship I couldn't anything online other than random lines or that article which was removed by the anon. I heard Takumi was once asked about such thing but I couldn't find the original source. Still due to issues with My computer I Will be less active. Feel free to address anything Tintor2 (talk) 10:19, 24 June 2024 (UTC)