Talk:Valkyria Chronicles
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
Expansion
editthe article is still very bare; those who have spare time please expand upon the lead section, setting, gameplay, games, characters, and reception sections. Osh33m (talk) 00:59, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
The table, the character/setting sections, and the current state of this article.
editI agree with The1337gamer about this. A table like this breaks the flow of the article - I think prose + a timeline template would be way more accessible. I also heavily disagree with this revert - if those sections were expanded, then that might be fine, but at the moment they are just two one-sentence sections about the series' plot. Sections that are that short only make the reading experience choppy. As general editing advice, I recommend combining mini-sections about related subjects and splitting enormous ones (at least into subsections). This strategy also applies to paragraphs within a section.
On a different note, I worry that this article is (mostly) built up without the use of sources. Way too often, I see people writing in articles about pop culture and just pulling from what they themselves know about the subject, or from some Mobygames/Wikipedia/Wikia page (while not even linking to that source), and as a result getting an article that is underdeveloped in a lot of areas, fancrufty, and unsourced. Writing with sources makes for a better product and is much easier to do. Sorry if this sounds aggressive and hostile, because I really don't want to come off like that, but I do think that there's a lot of work to be done on this article if we want to get it up to snuff, and I'd hate to see editors putting effort into the wrong thing and having their work replaced entirely when they could have just as easily or easier created the same thing themselves in the first place.--IDVtalk 01:22, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
- Most everything in the thread is verifiable in my opinion, it just needs expansion. You moved the characters section to be under setting, and I think that's fine, as long as they are still separate. I disagree however that the table breaks the flow of the article, considering it is opened up right at the games section, before the section is divided into the subsection for each game. Osh33m (talk) 20:06, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
This table is the exact same discussion we had at Souls (series). I oppose it's inclusion for the same reasons given there. -- ferret (talk) 22:06, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
- I didn't agree there and I don't agree here, but I can't win against a consensus. Osh33m (talk) 03:14, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
- In addition to text ("prose"), I vote in favor of using a (sortable) table to present series-relevant information instead of a simple reductionist timelines (e.g., Banjo-Kazooie_(series)#Games). It is tedious to search through the text and individual articles and misses the possibility of direct comparison. Of course, only important criteria of the titles should be included in the columns. I don't see how a table in the beginning of a section "breaks" an article. Did you ever read a scientific paper? They have both tables and figures between paragraphs without "breaking" anything... to the contrary! What consensus? Has there been a vote where an important number of contributors participated? Hippo99 (talk) 15:58, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
Feel free to join: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games#Video game series: Template:Video game timeline vs Template:Wikitable sortable vs Template:Video game titles Best regards, Hippo99 (talk) 09:44, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
Proposed merge with List of Valkyria Chronicles characters
editThis character list doesn't have sources to show its independent notability from the series. It's a hatrack for all kinds of minor characters and video game trivia. The major characters can be adequately merged to the corresponding character section of the parent article. czar 02:40, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
- Disagree on merging this, at least in whole, due to WP:SIZESPLIT. If content is merged, it must be trimmed considerably first. -- ferret (talk) 15:14, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
- Merge candidates are almost exclusively pared down before merger. In this case, only the main characters would need to be imported, and only a few sourced sentences from each. czar 03:04, 9 August 2016 (UTC)
Requested move 23 December 2017
edit- 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: Pages moved. (non-admin closure) sami talk 08:57, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
– In my opinion, simply "Valkyria" is an unfitting name for the series. The vast majority of the series is entitled Valkyria Chronicles (games 1-4), and the critically maligned Valkyria Revolution is just a spin-off. It would be as if a spinoff of F-Zero was released entitled F-Two, and suddenly we moved the series article to simply "F". It would only make sense to excise part of the name if a significant subset of the games involved alternative names. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 09:41, 23 December 2017 (UTC)
- Support Full name is likely the common name for the series. Every entry except the single spin-off uses the full name, including the anime and manga. -- ferret (talk) 14:35, 23 December 2017 (UTC)
- Support unless there is strong evidence that the series is better know as simply Valkyria we should use them full title especially since only a single spinoff game didn’t use it.--67.68.21.146 (talk) 23:22, 23 December 2017 (UTC)
- @Zxcvbnm: when I first developed the page, the announcement of Valkyria Azure Revolution is the only reason why I didn't create the page as Valkyria Chronicles. So, if the consensus is to move it to that, then go for it. Osh33m (talk) 18:19, 2 January 2018 (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 or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.