Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Final Fantasy/Sub-projects/Jobs

General discussion
Go go. — Cua HL 11:23, 1 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Good work on getting this far, guys. Good luck with the rest. If there's no objections, I wouldn't mind helping out. Ryu Kaze 18:45, 1 March 2006 (UTC)


 * By the way, I feel like while the skeleton model is good, I'm starting to think it's going to call for a lot of unnecessary fluff; extrinsic info that's really beyond the scope of the articles' purpose. Particularly the influences/references stuff and trying to seperate specialties from the introductions. With the latter, one would spend a ton of time trying to work their way around repeating theirself while justifying the presences of the seperate "Introduction" and "Specialities" sections. Ryu Kaze 20:43, 1 March 2006 (UTC)


 * You may have a point regarding the Speciality section, however, I've given the template a live tryout at Summoner (Final Fantasy) - see what you think. >Gamemaker 13:53, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

It's good, no denying. Truly, there's nothing wrong with it. Even so, there's two questions that have to be asked: "Is it anything that couldn't have been done as adequately here?" and "When it comes to the Chemist and the Thief, are you going to be able to provide a comparable level of information, when that which they're being compared to could have been dealt with at the same level of proficiency with the addition of 'Throughout the series, links have often been made between summoners and forehead horns, often with little or no explanation. In most cases they appear to be decorations, while in Final Fantasy IX they were a biological trait of summoners' to this summary?"

I'm not trying to knock on the format at all. It's truly good, and if this were "Races of Middle-Earth" or something like that, I'd call such a format a necessity. As it is, though, this is FF job classes and there's really not that much to say about any of them, including the ones that have been utilized in some of the storylines (Black Mages, Dragon Knights, Dark Knights, Paladins and Summoners being the most notable in this group). What's going to happen is that you'll either find yourself with no choice but to add fluff or no choice but to merge them anyway, and even with those that have more info, like the summoners, there's still not enough general info about them as a job class to warrant more than a sentence or two more on their main page summaries.

What I mean by that is, sure, you could technically talk about summoners for a long, long time. You could bring the Ronso's horns in and talk about the statue they said they'd make of Yuna in X and the one that they'll actually make of her in FFX-2 with a horn on it, but is that a summary of the summoner job class, or a summary of Yuna, the Ronso, or Final Fantasy X's summoners? In all honesty, it's not even a summary of Final Fantasy X's summoners and is more a discussion of Yuna herself and maybe the Ronso. You'd mention something like that in an article on them, and throw in a line within parentheses that said "a reference to the horns usually seen on the foreheads of summoners throughout the Final Fantasy series."

Does that make sense? Ryu Kaze 17:49, 2 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Bear in mind, the project aim isn't just to apply the new format to all class articles, but only to those eventually deemed notable enough. As you rightly say, many classes will eventually be merged into the main class list; in fact the Thief article ain't even part of WPFF any more =) >Gamemaker 22:00, 2 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Alright. Just to make it clear, again, I think the model's a good design and the best one for such a purpose and again, the Summoner article is well done. You did a good job on it. Ryu Kaze 15:15, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Voting
Thought a voting table would make overview a bit simpler :) Obviously you can change your votes at any time — Cua HL 23:18, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I tried to add my votes but couldn't get the formatting right to save my life. :(  Just wanted to say something in case anyone was wondering where I was... -RaCha&#39;ar 16:31, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I've added a few comments and a bit of spacing to the first couple of rows in the table - using those as examples might hopefully make it a bit easier to work with =) >Gamemaker 17:05, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Careful
We should be careful when merging character classes that exist in many other RPGs (both pen & paper and computer) like Thief (character class) and Monk (character class). Like I said earlier, Final Fantasy didn't invent these character classes and the article should reflect that. In these cases, my votes for merge should be considered a vote to just merge the information, not redirect the article. --JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 01:27, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
 * In that case you need to stick your vote in the third column =) >Gamemaker 10:00, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
 * You're kidding. *sigh* I took me long enough to put my votes in the first time. Whatever happened to WP:VIE anyway? --JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 13:37, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Heh, we're not actually voting for anything per se, I just constructed the table so we could get an idea on who favours what decisions. — Cua HL 20:35, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Looking good
I know I've not done a whole lot on this since looking at each article, offering an opinion, and then voting, but I wanted to say things are looking good guys. Ryu Kaze 23:12, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Uh yeah, I'd like to offer my apologies too. I signed up for this but haven't had much time to help. I promise I'll do something useful soon — Cua HL e 23:26, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Hello?
Anyone there? We haven't worked on this in a couple of months - anyone want to reboot this project? :) -RaCha&#39;ar 16:40, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Merges
I'm going ahead and adding the merge template to all the articles that were decided upon for merging, as the first of the many steps that we decided on months ago. I'm willing to undertake all of this alone, but any volunteers to help would be luverly... -RaCha&#39;ar 21:47, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Infobox
Hey everyone! I know I'm not a member of this sub-project, but I'd like to bring something to your attention. Since most of the articles are being merged anyway, is FF class really necessary? It only has three fields anyway and surely all the information is/should be covered in prose? It's a plenty decent template, but if there are only going to be five-ish (or less) articles, then you may want to consider it for deletion. Just thought I'd bring it to everyone's attention! – warpedmirror  ( talk ) 23:44, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Nobody here but us chickens. That is, me.  I'll look into the template once I'm done merging things... once my self-imposed Wikibreak is over, that is.  Thanks for pointing it out. :)  -RaCha&#39;ar 17:27, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Bard (Final Fantasy)
This could become "Bard/Dancer/Songstress" on the ff character classes list (like "Fighter/Knight/Warrior") and what little info there is on it should go there. That one large paragraph it has on its own page would look surprsingly shorter when there didn't have to be extra sentences to mention job classes that are variations of this one. Ryu Kaze 19:14, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Agree on "Bard/Dancer/Songstress" and suggest the article be called Dancer — Cua HL 22:51, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
 * JiFish, you've optioned to leave a general-interest article behind for this one, but I don't see any non-FF info contained here..? >Gamemaker 22:19, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
 * That's right. We should merge all the information, but not re-direct the article. Leave a stub, instead. Something like:

"Bard is a character class in a number of role-playing games and computer role-playing games, including Final Fantasy." Just because the information doesn't yet exist, doesn't mean this isn't where it should be. The page should be reserved for future expansion. --JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 22:27, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree, but dislike the idea of a stub. — Cua HL 22:31, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
 * We don't have an option, unless somebody wants to write the article. It's not our place to redirect an article (that should be) about RPGs in general to a page purely about Final Fantasy. For example, the first place I ever saw the Bard charcter class was AD&D. Stubs don't stay stubs too long on wikipedia anyway. ;) It'll be expanded before you know it. --JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 22:36, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Well my first thought was "No way, stubs are bad.." but I agree, we can't go assuming that anyone who types in Bard automatically want Final Fantasy. I agree with you JiFish :D — Cua HL 21:23, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Actually, I've just noticed that, unlike the others, the title of this article is Bard (Final Fantasy) not Bard (Character Class). Therefore we can merge and redirect this article, and I'll create a stub for Bard (Character Class). *sigh* What a mess! --JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 14:38, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
 * D'oh =) I've removed the prettyform names from the article sections, so we can more clearly see what we're dealing with. >Gamemaker 15:49, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
 * cool site, man

Beastmaster (character class)
Morpher should go under this category too - IF it's deemed notable enough to get its own article. It really hasn't appeared in that many games. There has been some debate scattered across various project pages about whether this could be lumped with Blue Mage, since they're all jobs that involve using enemies to one's own advantage. The one problem with this is certainly that Blue Mage is such an individual and notable job; Morpher/Beastmaster/Trainer/etc really aren't. Either way I don't feel this class is notable enough for its own article. -RaCha&#39;ar 18:02, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Agree, vote Morpher/Beastmaster/Trainer etc is n/n and should be in article list instead — Cua HL 22:52, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Berserker (character class)
Barely notable in Final Fantasy at all, and what info's on this page is comparable to what's already on the main character classes page. Should be merged. Ryu Kaze 19:20, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Agreed, merged. >Gamemaker 22:24, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Given the discussion above in the Bard subsection, perhaps this redirect page should be replaced with a stub? >Gamemaker 16:13, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Agreed. --JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 16:42, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Black Mage
Despite its length, all that detailed info on each appearance has already been adequately summarized into a single paragraph on the main character classes page, and the references section should be altogether dropped. All that detailed appearance info is just a long-winded recounting of what's already in the character classes list (and not even as tidy), and the references info is not only beyond the scope of the article, but anyone actually looking up info on Black Mages in FF is either going be aware of the references already, or will get it with a simple explanation of "Black Mages in Final Fantasy use Black Magic."

I think hardly any of the extrinsict info on this page is Wikipedia worthy or necessary. Ryu Kaze 19:19, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Blue Mage
As with Black Mage, this is really just a long winded version of what's on the main character classes page, info that's already been appropriately condensed. Should be merged. Ryu Kaze 19:39, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Chemist (character class)
Good info here, but I question its necessity, as the whole "long winded version of what's on the main page" theme is still going on here. Summarized version on the main page could be lengtheneded a little if needed, but a seperate page for this is only slight more sensible than one for Berserkers. Ryu Kaze 19:43, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Dark Knight (character class)
The info here's comparable to what's already on the character classes page, and it should simply be merged. Ryu Kaze 20:15, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

opppps, because i just started writing it up. Jammi568 22:45, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Dragon Knight (character class)
Once the FFXI Dragoon info is incorporated into the FFXI character classes page, this page will become comparable to the section already on the FF character classes page, and it becomes a prime example of merge candidacy. Ryu Kaze 20:19, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Geomancer (character class)

 * Requires renaming
 * Possible merge candidate - doesn't appear particularly notable, having appeared in only two main-series titles. Most data could be concisely rewritten in prose and moved to Final Fantasy character classes. >Gamemaker 15:01, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Monk (character class)
This is another page that mirrors its main page entry as far as the FF class goes. The FF Monk should be merged, and the FF section on the current page should link to the main character classes page. What little bit there is on Dungeons & Dragons monks probably isn't relevant enough to warrant a page on its own either, but the page should remain to serve as a disambiguation page between D&D's monks and FF's monks. Ryu Kaze 20:23, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Merged 8-Bit Theater ref and pointed general page to class list. >Gamemaker 00:35, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Ninja (character class)
The appearances info on this one could be condensed in the same vein as all the others (particularly the Dragon Knight section; how the info on its individual page is condensed on the main page would serve as a great reference here), the Ninjutsu translations dropped altogether, and it could be herded into merge city. Ryu Kaze 20:26, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Ranger (needs adding to list)
Right now, this page is in the category of Final Fantasy Character Classes, which it obviously shouldn't be since that page talks about more than just the FF version. Ranger is a barely notable job class in Final Fantasy as a whole, and what little info there is could -- and should -- easily be incorporated into the main Final Fantasy character classes page. The original page should remain since its not just about the FF class, probably with a link that says "For Rangers in Final Fantasy, see the Final Fantasy character classes page." Ryu Kaze 18:55, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I've removed the template of notable FF jobs from this page, and added a seealso link to the main class list. If someone who knows more about the Ranger class in FF games wants to write a summary for the list article, feel free. >Gamemaker 22:50, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Red Mage
This one's exactly like its Blue Mage and Black Mage siblings. Nothing to warrant its individuality, and every reason to merge. Ryu Kaze 20:28, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Samurai (character class)
FFXI Samurai info should be merged into the FFXI character classes page, the info on Marquis Elmdor and Arc Knights from Tactics should be added to the summary on the main FF character classes page, and this should then be merged. Ryu Kaze 20:31, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Summoner (Final Fantasy)
The "History and depictions" section here seems largely long-winded and full of extrinsic information. The formatting as well is highly unnecessary.

The history info qualifies as appearances, already covered on the main character classes page, and the depictions information is beyond the scope and purpose of such an entry, with the obvious exception of mentioning characters who had the role of Summoner. It then becomes another merge candidate. Ryu Kaze 20:36, 1 March 2006 (UTC)


 * I've cleaned this article up somewhat and renamed it. Unless it can be tightened further, and I'm not saying it shouldn't be, I wouldn't agree to merging it yet. >Gamemaker 13:57, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Thief
A lot of fluff here. All the really relevant stuff is covered by the main page's entry on the Thief job class. Maybe mention of some of the other Thief classes (or the Thief computer game) could be added at the end of the section, but otherwise, this is another merger demanding to happen. Ryu Kaze 20:40, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

This article has been hijacked! This article should be about the character class in RPGs generally. It has have become polluted with information on FF. We should try to restore it to a generic article. --JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 23:36, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Indeed, there is no FF-related information that doesn't already live or would be happier on the main list. Move/remove the FF info and remove Thief (character class) from WPFF. >Gamemaker 11:26, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Done and Done. >Gamemaker 14:13, 2 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Which brings up a point I meant to make: Combining all these job classes onto one page makes monitoring fancruft, fluff, and extrinsic info worlds easier. Ryu Kaze 10:02, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
 * That's what Watchlists are for =) >Gamemaker 11:26, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Time/Space Mage
Practically a cut/paste of its main article entry. Merge material for sure. Ryu Kaze 20:44, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Merged. >Gamemaker 16:08, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Warrior (character class)
This case is nearly identical to that of the Ranger character class, with the exception being that there's already a section for this on the main page that actually has more info on FF Warriors at. This should be merged into the main character classes page, a link to FF Warriors linked from the Warrior character class page, and that page taken out of the FF character classes category. Ryu Kaze 20:06, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

White Mage
Long winded and unnecessary sections on the appearances of White Mages. It's quite enough to say "They were in Final Fantasy X-2." "Yuna, Rikku and Paine could turn into White Mages at any time in Final Fantasy X-2" is just not necessary. Main page summarizes their appearances appropriately. From there, the folklore section should be chopped off and we've got merge material. Ryu Kaze 20:49, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Final Fantasy character classes
Each of my analyzations has concluded that all of the job classes should be merged in here, and all of the unnecessary fluff sliced off. The sections that go into detail on each appearance (Dragon Knight, Monk, White Mage, etc.) are major offenders here. (Edit: Furthermore, it makes monitoring for fancruft, fluff, and extrinsic info worlds easier, a boon that the ill-fated Thief page could have done with. Ryu Kaze 10:04, 2 March 2006 (UTC))

I also think the skeleton model isn't going to work all that well for most of these for reasons I've mentioned above. It's a great model, but it calls for too much unnecessary information and too much unnecessary expansion simply for the sake of justifying the presence of a section under the model. My two pesos. Ryu Kaze 20:53, 1 March 2006 (UTC)