Talk:Abyss-
|
This is the talk page for discussing the page, Abyss-. | |
|---|---|
|
Please try to
|
Shouldn't be named Abyss
I think this is a similar situation to the previous translation of Hieratics, which was Hieroglyph. The problem with calling these cards Abyss cards is that if, hypothetically, a card was made that tutored a card from this archetype, it would be able to tutor Abyssal Designator, Abyssal Kingshark, Contract with the Abyss, and many others.
No, I don't have a suggestion for what they should be called. Depth was suggested on Pojo, and that's what we ultimately decided to use on Dueling Network, but Depth Amulet, Dweller in the Depths and Fish Depth Charge also exist, so... Yeah. I don't know what to suggest. AEtherchild (Talk|Contribs) 05:08, May 21, 2012 (UTC)
- Cards with "Abyss" but without "アビス Abisu":
- Abyss Flower
- Abyssal Designator
- Abyssal Kingshark
- Barrier Statue of the Abyss
- Contract with the Abyss
- Dark King of the Abyss
- Diabolos, King of the Abyss
- Old cards with "アビス Abisu":
- Abyss Soldier
- Gishki Abyss
- Shining Abyss
- Silent Abyss
- Volcanic Abyss
- So TCG Konami will be better off not using "Abyss". However, it is perfectly fine as long as OCG Konami does not troll and keeps it as "Abyss" Spell/Trap Support only; which is what they are likely to do, so it should be fine as it is for now.
- -Falzar FZ- (talk page|useful stuff) 12:14, May 21, 2012 (UTC)
- Technically, "Abyss Flower" could be excluded from the first set, as it has not been released into the TCG (the name we have is from the video games, and those aren't 100 percent official). I'd also like to point out that there is no card that uses "アビス Abisu" but is called something other than "Abyss" in the TCG. This is another case of "Guardian" and "Butterfly". They'll either have to keep support restricted to S/T or include 6 exclusions on the cards that support monsters. But anyway, this page's name is fine/proper.--Golden Key (talk • contribs) 14:01, May 21, 2012 (UTC)
- The reason "Abyss Flower" was included is similar to "Desert Protector" was included in Gardna due to OCG name; only that I am saying the former was actually included as of it TCG name. But I agreed with Goldy that Abyss was not named same way as all other "Abyss" monsters listed up above. --iFredCat 14:11, May 21, 2012 (UTC)
- Technically, "Abyss Flower" could be excluded from the first set, as it has not been released into the TCG (the name we have is from the video games, and those aren't 100 percent official). I'd also like to point out that there is no card that uses "アビス Abisu" but is called something other than "Abyss" in the TCG. This is another case of "Guardian" and "Butterfly". They'll either have to keep support restricted to S/T or include 6 exclusions on the cards that support monsters. But anyway, this page's name is fine/proper.--Golden Key (talk • contribs) 14:01, May 21, 2012 (UTC)
- We do not need to make up names for archetypes so that cards that that need be excluded are. That is Konami's job. A note on the archetype page that says "these cards are excluded because" should more than suffice. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 16:24, May 21, 2012 (UTC)
- Most of the cards that are listed as part of this so called Abyss archetype already belong to the Mermail archetype. Essentially there are two pages on the same archetype with no real reason for the redundancy in the first place. Personally I think that unless they make an archetype around monsters that are named like "Abyss whatever," there is no reason for this page to exist for the time being. Axel Shiokawa (talk • contribs) 23:04, August 8, 2012 (UTC)
- Redundancy doesnt change the fact that the site has Mermails listed as two different archetypes all because several of them have Abyss somewhere in the name. Also if you take all of the Mermails out, you have nothing but a random lot of cards that have no common effect or theme, which gives more evidence that Abyss isnt even a real archetype in the first place. Axel Shiokawa (talk • contribs) 22:21, August 10, 2012 (UTC)
"Abyss" is a legitimate archetype based on the lore of "Mermail - Megaloabyss". "Abyssquall" and several other cards do not have "Mermail" in their names but are supported by "Megaloabyss". Hence, "Abyss" is a separate archetype. --Golden Key (talk • contribs) 22:56, August 10, 2012 (UTC)
- So every card with Abyss somewhere in its name and should be part of an archetype that only has 5 cards in it by the standards used by the Wiki? That seems like some wonderfully faulty logic considering that most of the cards in the "archetype" are Mermails or straight up generic Water support. Axel Shiokawa (talk • contribs) 21:59, August 12, 2012 (UTC)
- What 5 cards are you talking about? If we took out every card from this archetype that didn't have "Mermail" in its name, there would actually be no card "Mermail - Megaloabyss" could search at all. You seem very confused about the "standards used by the Wiki". --Golden Key (talk • contribs) 22:10, August 12, 2012 (UTC)
- The current archetype categorization is borne of three exhaustive forum discussions, the final of which can be found here. We even considered changing it later. "Mermail - Megaloabyss" may only search out cards that are related to the "Mermail" archetype, but per those discussions, any card with "アビス" in its Japanese name is a member. Does doing it this way result in some clusterfucks that don't make much sense? Yes. But it results in less of them than if we did it any other way. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 00:16, August 13, 2012 (UTC)
Are we really going to call this an archetype? It seems more liek a series if anything. It's not like "Abyss" monsters have specific support cards. --> Summoned Skull 2: Electric Boogaloo 02:54, August 13, 2012 (UTC)
- Megaloabyss explicitly supports them; that's all we need for this to be an archetype. As Cheesedude pointed out above, we have had very lengthy discussions stretching over months about how we define archetypes and the specifics of handling them. While there's still a rough edge here or there that needs smoothed out, the core of the issue is long resolved. 「ディノ奴千？！」? · ☎ Dinoguy1000 03:00, August 13, 2012 (UTC)
"Abyss" VS "Abyss-"
Who renamed this to "Abyss-"? "Abyss-" is something COMPLETELY different from "Abyss". Why do they keep referring to it as "Abyss-" throughout the article despite clearly stating the "Abyss" cards and not the "Abyss-" cards?
Come on, guys. There is a very specific reason they put the hyphen in there. It's not a difficult concept to grasp.184.79.227.75 (talk) 00:39, November 14, 2012 (UTC)
- Because that's what the English copy of Mermail Abyssmegalo says. The page name will use what the English lore says.
- The members list will use what the Japanese lore says, which is anything with "アビス".
- -Falzar FZ- (talk page|useful stuff) 00:46, November 14, 2012 (UTC)
Image
While I realize that our categorization of archetypes does not take card type into account, shouldn't the page image be of a card that is an intended part of the archetype - in this case, not a monster? Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 06:48, December 28, 2012 (UTC)
