Difference between revisions of "Card Trivia talk:Fenghuang"

From Yugipedia
Jump to: navigation, search
(+talkheader)
(Pokemon fanboys: Read this first (although I'm sure you won't))
Line 16: Line 16:
  
 
:::* Unfortunately, that's probably true.--[[User:YamiWheeler|YamiWheeler]] ([[User talk:YamiWheeler|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/YamiWheeler|contribs]]) 02:58, July 15, 2011 (UTC)
 
:::* Unfortunately, that's probably true.--[[User:YamiWheeler|YamiWheeler]] ([[User talk:YamiWheeler|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/YamiWheeler|contribs]]) 02:58, July 15, 2011 (UTC)
 +
::::* I actually tacked on 'Incidentally, the Pokemon, Ho-Oh, is based on the Fenghuang as well.' when I added the bit about the Fenghuang, because I knew that if I didn't do it, an edit war would break out, involving a lot of frustration and randoms with questionable language skills. In fact, I've seen people on another message board seriously try to argue that this card is based on the Pokemon before I edited this page. Also, something really should be done about Keeota1012. [[User:Ruri-ruri Mode|Ruri-ruri Mode]] ([[User talk:Ruri-ruri Mode|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Ruri-ruri Mode|contribs]]) 06:17, August 3, 2011 (UTC)

Revision as of 06:17, 3 August 2011

This is the talk page for discussing the page, Card Trivia:Fenghuang.

Please try to

  • Be polite
  • Assume good faith
  • Be welcoming

Pokemon fanboys: Read this first (although I'm sure you won't)

  • STOP adding Ho-Oh trivia to this page. They are NOT related in any way. Houoh's name is NOT similar to Ho-Oh's - it is similar to Houou, the Japanese name of the mythological Chinese beast that both are based off of. Ignorant people who see Ho-Oh and then see Houoh and think they've discovered something groundbreaking are wrong. Stop. Adding. It. If you have an intelligent argument for why the trivia is at all relevant, say it here.--YamiWheeler (talkcontribs) 01:58, July 15, 2011 (UTC)
  • Well, a small blurb along the lines of "Ho-oh from the Pokemon franchise is based off the same mythological creature, explaining the resemblence both in name and design." is 1.) Relatively accurate, 2.) pretty much harmless, and 3.) could potentially reduce the impulse of people making additional edits to the page on the matter. 75.49.10.155 (talk) 02:26, July 15, 2011 (UTC)
  • Why are we adding a blurb about something completely unrelated to Yu-Gi-Oh! that happens to have the same origin as this card? They look the same as what a Fenghuang is actually depicted as. This card does not resemble Ho-Oh, they both resemble Fenghuang, and the trivia for that creature has already been added to the page. If we add Ho-Oh for some idiotic reason, then I don't see why we don't add a small blurb for every other thing that is based off of a Houou, too. And trust me, there are a lot. We're only having this discussion because 10 year olds think there's some value in similarities like this. Next, we'll be adding that random Tiger cards are based off of Simba from Lion King.--YamiWheeler (talkcontribs) 02:30, July 15, 2011 (UTC)
  • Okay, by the same token why do we say Crystal Beast Ruby Carbuncle resembles Espeon? Why is there a random blurb on Galaxy-Eyes about his chest resembling the Color Timer in Ultraman? The triva pages are riddled with things like this, and not having the blurb will end up with edit wars of that sort every time somebody who's played Pokemon visits that page and finds that absent. It's not important to me; I'm just trying to reduce potential headaches down the road. 75.49.10.155 (talk) 02:36, July 15, 2011 (UTC)
  • The difference is that Espeon is not an existing creature that is directly taken from mythology. Like I said, saying that Ho-Oh resembles Houoh is like saying Simba resembles, IDK, All-Seeing Tiger, despite the fact that they both are just tigers. Espeon is a creature created by Pokemon, and that card legitimately resembles it. The Ultraman trivia is similar, I'm sure, but I'm not familiar with it. And my stance is just that this place is already full of worthless "trivia" like "lololsnipehunterseffectissimilartodarkarmeddragon." Worthless similarities based solely on the fact that the associated material is popular shouldn't be added, especially when they have 0 basis.--YamiWheeler (talkcontribs) 02:45, July 15, 2011 (UTC)
  • Fair enough. You've convinced me of the distinction. However, I do believe this will continue to be a area that people will repetitively attempt to edit unless some blurb is here. 75.49.10.155 (talk) 02:57, July 15, 2011 (UTC)
  • I actually tacked on 'Incidentally, the Pokemon, Ho-Oh, is based on the Fenghuang as well.' when I added the bit about the Fenghuang, because I knew that if I didn't do it, an edit war would break out, involving a lot of frustration and randoms with questionable language skills. In fact, I've seen people on another message board seriously try to argue that this card is based on the Pokemon before I edited this page. Also, something really should be done about Keeota1012. Ruri-ruri Mode (talkcontribs) 06:17, August 3, 2011 (UTC)