User talk:ZingerZheng

Welcome

Welcome to the Yu-Gi-Oh! Wikia, feel free to ask me if you have doubts. You may also like to take a look to our FAQ if you have questions. --Dragon Slayer (Contribs • Count) 20:10, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

• (?_?) Hi. Do you think you can post your deck? Feel free to comment/criticize mine.

Voodude 22:36, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Japanese names

• I see what you are trying to do, but the current template makes it look very awkward since they now appear to have two Japanese names. Danny Lilithborne 01:31, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Japanese lores

I noticed you adding Japanese lores to card pages, and I wonder where you get them. Copying them off the card seems tiresome to me. And are they, when applicable, the latest (errata'd) ones? Rainyday2012 00:34, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Japanese Transations

Hi! I do alot of the Japanese transitions, do you think you can help me? Airblade86 20:35, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

• Airblade, Don't you do Chinese translations too? I noticed here. Fireblade77 01:15, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Redirects

Thanks for making the redirects. Remember to add the sets to the cards' pages as well. :) --Golden Key (talk • contribs) 17:41, December 27, 2011 (UTC)

Corn

Corn is not archetype, its a series. So we don't add every card that has the right Japanese name. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 04:01, May 22, 2012 (UTC)

Ah, nevermind. I was unaware that we finally had a concrete effect nailed down for "Corn Parade". Carry on. Sorry. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 04:04, May 22, 2012 (UTC)

Spell Spice

Hi Zinger. I just noticed you fluffed out the "Spell Spice" page yesterday. I was wondering, can you tell if "Curry Fiend Roux" actually supports the "Spice" archetype, or is it actually a "Spell Spice" support card? If so, maybe its "Spice" that should be the redirect page. --Golden Key (talk • contribs) 23:49, May 30, 2012 (UTC)

On Yu-Gi-Oh! GX - Episode 063, when "Curry Fiend Roux" is first Summoned, its ATK is 2400 since there were 6 removed from play monsters ("Carrot Man", "Black Stego", "Potato Man", "Onion Man", "Dark Driceratops", and "Dark Tyranno") and 3 "Spice" card in the Graveyard ("Red-Pepper Spice", "Spell Spice Cinnamon", and "Counter Spice Cumin"). (300 * 6 + 200 * 3 = 2400) Of the 3 "Spice" card, "Counter Spice Cumin" is not a "Spell Spice" card. If "Curry Fiend Roux" actually supports "Spell Spice", then its ATK would only be 2200. ZingerZheng (talk • contribs) 02:20, May 31, 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for clearing that up for me. :) --Golden Key (talk • contribs) 02:36, May 31, 2012 (UTC)

5D's Decklists

Thanks for helping with that. A few things. While you're adding cards or adding the Decklists, would you update {{Decklist}} while you're there? We're now using |effect monsters = instead of <u>Effect Monsters</u>. Likewise for any other type of monster and all types are supported, including Tuners, Spirits, etc. Also, if a card isn't used but appears in someone's hand or is Set, the best thing to do is add that to the Featured Duel as well. At the point that hand shot is shown, write "X's hand contains", then the cards. Thanks, Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 00:03, July 22, 2012 (UTC)

Cards in hand and cards that are drawn.

Thanks for updating the Decklists pages on 5d's. Can you try placing cards that are shown/known in hand in the featured duels page as well as the cards that are shown being drawn? I noticed episode 7 didn't have that even though it was shown in the episode. Try to check to make sure the previous episodes you did list that too please? Thank you!Cardsknower (talk • contribs) 04:54, July 27, 2012 (UTC)Cardsknower

That would be great. Just be sure to only do so when they are shown. We can figure out what people drew at certain points via process of elimination, but we shouldn't be doing that. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 17:04, July 27, 2012 (UTC)

Card Trudge set face-down in episode 12

Before Trudge ended his last turn of the Duel, it is stated on the episode 12 page that he sets "Broken Blocker". I want to know what proof you have on this because the shot is too small for me to make out the Trap.Cardsknower (talk • contribs) 21:56, August 1, 2012 (UTC)Cardsknower

It just looks like "Broken Blocker" to me. I might be wrong though. (Sorry for the delayed reply, just saw this.) ZingerZheng (talk • contribs) 18:48, August 20, 2012 (UTC)

JP Anime Lore of Wild Tornado

I have no knowledge on Japan language, so care to translation it completely - not using fake site translation as it was proved many times before. It's such to be just 1 S/T destroying, nothing more. (If you comment back, RESPOND HERE FIRST, as of my Talk Page is closed.) --iFredCat 02:51, August 20, 2012 (UTC)

Can't pick and choose

Dude, just because the archetype name is a part of a word, it doesn't make it part of the archetype because the characters added to that word change the meaning of that word. Like putting a silent "k" on "now" and "night" makes the words "know" and "knight", — This unsigned comment was made by Rocket.knight.777 (talk • contribs) 03:01, August 29, 2012 (UTC)

It does make it part of the archetype. Adding "Vehic" to "roid" makes "Vehicroid". But every "Vehicroid" monster is a "roid" monster. ZingerZheng (talk • contribs) 03:12, August 29, 2012 (UTC)

This is how archetypes are categorized. It was born of three separate forum discussions, the final of which took several months. Yes, we are aware its not perfect, and there are some unintended things that happen because of it. But doing it this way causes less issues than any other way. Don't think we haven't thought of the exact point you are trying to make, Rocket Knight. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 03:20, August 29, 2012 (UTC)

Respectfully Cheesedude, just because I'm the only one now mentioning it doesn't mean that others aren't thinking it. To see card's in an archetype that just slightly matches in name only is confusing, especially to new duelists. Perhaps it might be time to reconsider that idea. --Rocket.knight.777 (talk • contribs) 03:33, August 29, 2012 (UTC)

We are aware its confusing, but its still the best option we came up with. Not including every card brings up problems as to where to draw the line. I myself even suggested changing it after instituting the current system. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 03:38, August 29, 2012 (UTC)

Really? There'd be problems on where to draw the line? Seems to me the line is simple "If it doesn't fit the archetype, it does not belong in that archetype." Names are not the main focus of an archetype, just an indicator. Just because a card shares the wording of the name, to add it to the archetype because of that is like jamming a puzzle piece where it doesn't fit, it ruins the puzzle and the integrity of the one who is working to solve it. To respectfully translate, it makes the admins seem lazy because they are allowing cards to be where they don't belong and that they don't care about the integrity of the cards or the game. I'm in no way trying to insult you or the other admins, I'm calmly saying how this would look to some people. --Rocket.knight.777 (talk • contribs) 04:11, August 29, 2012 (UTC)

Names are the main focus of an archetype. The Japanese lores define archetype as "『〇〇』と名のつい た" (contains "〇〇" in its name). Even Konami uses this idea: If "Gravekeeper's Servant" is treated as a monster by the effect of "Magical Hats", it would gain 500 ATK/DEF from "Necrovalley", implies that it is part of the "Gravekeeper's" archetype. ZingerZheng (talk • contribs) 07:08, August 29, 2012 (UTC)

Exactly, we do it this way because that's how it actually works. "Photon Generator Unit" isn't really related to the "Photon" archetype, but it isa member since its Japanese name contains the right text. It is a valid target for the effect of a (theoretical) card that searches for a "Photon" Spell/Trap. When looking at archetype cards, you have to ignore the English name. Pretend it isn't there, pretend you don't know what it translates to. The only condition is "has X in its Japanese name". "Hero's Rule 2" is a "Rose", "Thought Ruler Archfiend" is a "Sphere". Were they intended to be? No. But they are, and not because we say so - because Konami does. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 12:18, August 29, 2012 (UTC)

Aheh, I very highly doubt that Konami does or would or that anyone in Japan would feel the same way, but I'm tired of trying to fight this. This is me walking away.--Rocket.knight.777 (talk • contribs) 12:39, August 29, 2012 (UTC)

This doesn't mean you win, I just means I'm done. There is a difference.--Rocket.knight.777 (talk • contribs) 13:14, August 29, 2012 (UTC)

If they don't, why would they word the card lores that way.

This isn't an argument, this is a discussion. No one wins. I suggest you read the conversations I linked you to above if you haven't yet. They may give you a better perspective on how much thought went into this system. If you still have doubts, I would peak with User:Dinoguy1000, who has put more thought into this than any other user and should be able to explain any concerns you still have better than I.

Also, hope you didn't mind my sort of hijacking your talk page, Zinger. If you did, I apologize and I'll refrain from doing so in the future. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 14:12, August 29, 2012 (UTC)

If this was a discussion, then it should have ended when I said I had walked away, yet by continuing you are dragging me by in. I read you link and all it did was prove my point. The reason they put the limits on those cards is so that people don't get confused on what the archetype is. Despite having "roid" in their name Magical Android and Necroid Shaman are not "roid" monsters because they are not the cartoony, Machine-Type Vehicroids that the support card work for. Revival Knight is meant to only target the Fiend-Type Hidden Knights. Again I say the name is not what makes an archetype but the theme that is behind it. If it was in name only then there should be an Angel archetype, an Sorcerer archetype, and cards like Ancient Leaf and Ancient Sunshine should be in the Ancient Archetype used by Grandpa Muto. A Series is marked as a group of cards that share a theme, like the Sparrow Family, and an archetype is an evolution of that in that they share a name and a theme. With this point now made I walk away. Good day.--Rocket.knight.777 (talk • contribs) 16:15, August 29, 2012 (UTC)

I don't consider this an argument because its continuting. I don't think we are being rude to one another, we're not arguing. I'm simply replying to attempt to get you to see my point of my view (I'm aware that may not happen). I'm certainly not trying to be mean or offend you. If I am, please let me know. I apologize.

No, those are "roid" monsters. Not all "roid" support cards say the target must be Machine-Type (though that doesn't matter to begin with). The requirements for an archetype are that it has at least one support card. For the Knight example, those are not the only Fiend-Type "Knights". There's also "Shadowknight Archfiend" and "Skull Knight 2". It may have been intended for the "Hidden Knights", but the Japanese text does not say that. That is the animator or writer's fault, not ours. The wiki has to account for all aspects of the franchise. Does the "Knight" archetype matter to the TCG? Absolutely not. But it still must be documented.

If there is no support, its not an archetype, that's why the "Ancient" cards you mentioned are not an archetype. A series shares a theme, yes.

You have made your point. I am simply telling you why that point is wrong - from the perspective of how the wiki has to operate with this issue. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 16:36, August 29, 2012 (UTC)

It's true what you said about names not being the main focus. But once a support card, which affects all cards with a certain term in their name is created, it is the main focus from a gameplay perspective. Things which weren't originally intended to be members become members.

You said that you doubt Konami or anyone in Japan feel that way, but Konami have actually ruled it that way for some of the examples used in this conversation. Here they've said that "Elemental HERO Necroid Shaman", "Dark Jeroid" and "Magical Android" are viable targets for "roid" support cards. Although the UDE rulings are now declared unofficial, most of them are still correct and here you can see their rulings for "Necrovalley", which state that "Gravekeeper's Servant" gains ATK from "Necrovalley" when it's treated as a monster. Konami have loads more examples like "Darkness Neosphere" is a "Neos" monster, here. -- Deltaneos (talk) 17:15, August 29, 2012 (UTC)

What card in real life would allow you to treat a Cont. Spell as a Monsters? To make the focus of the archetype the support cards is even more crazy, and insulting to the work the artists put into the cards so that they could share a common theme between them. Look at the Lavals. Some of the Monsters in that archetype do not share the name, but are still Laval Monsters because they share the theme of being born in the molten lands of the Duel Terminal world. If you say it's because they support the Lavals, look at the Soaring Eagle, it doesn't support them, they support it. Name, support, AND theme are and/or should be what makes the archetype. This is Rocket Knight FYI, can't log in, in a hurry.--131.183.107.139 (talk) 17:47, August 29, 2012 (UTC)

"Magical Hats" can treat "Gravekeeper's Servant" as a Monster Card, and then it is treated as a "Gravekeeper's" monster, obviously, and it gains 500 ATK/DEF. I think this example was brought up before, in fact. As for the archetype issue, if Konami didn't want us to use names to gauge what archetypes are, they wouldn't support cards based on name. They would, in the example of "Laval Lakeside Lady", instead list: "If this card is in your Graveyard and you have 3 or more "monsters that share the theme of being born in molten lands of the Duel Terminal world" with different names in your Graveyard:..." and so on.--YamiWheeler (talk • contribs) 19:22, August 29, 2012 (UTC)

That's not what I said and you know it. Name is only a part, yet you ise as the whole. Name, support, AND theme are and/or should be what makes the archetype.--Rocket.knight.777 (talk • contribs) 19:40, August 29, 2012 (UTC)

Actually, I have no idea what you mean, but considering that thought process, how do you propose we organize it on the Wiki?--YamiWheeler (talk • contribs) 20:39, August 29, 2012 (UTC)

Like I've said, If the card's share a name, have the support, and follow the overall theme of the archetype; they belong in the archetype.--Rocket.knight.777 (talk • contribs) 20:57, August 29, 2012 (UTC)

Please bear with me here; there's a lot of ground to cover for me to properly explain myself.

Rocket, it sounds to me like your position comes largely from a view that archetypes are just a special type of series. While this is an understandable position - and it is entirely correct for many archetypes - it doesn't actually work because of how Konami themselves have handled archetype support in various rulings (as Deltaneos pointed out above). Because of this, archetypes and series work much better and make much more sense if you view them as two separate but related things: they are both groups of cards which share some common bond, but an archetype's common bond is a gameplay mechanic (specifically, one or more support cards which list a particular string that archetype members must have in their Japanese names), while a series' common bond is a design theme of some type (such as being used by a particular character, or being derived from a particular story/legend/mythos/etc., or so on).

When you view them in this way, you can see that an archetype may contain a series - and most archetypes are simply a series with one or more support cards - but also that a series can contain an archetype, an archetype can contain multiple series (and vice versa), and a series can contain other series (and an archetype can contain other archetypes). However, another conclusion is that every archetype has at least one series of cards at its core; this is usually the series that the archetype's support card(s) was intended to accompany.

For example, look at one of the oldest archetypes in the game, the "Archfiends". This is a group of cards that all share a common theme of being demonic in nature, but there's a bit more here: there is also a smaller series in this group, the Chess Archfiends, that share the theme of being based on chess pieces (and the first "Archfiend" support card is actually a part of this series as well). While this series doesn't have any support cards of its own (that is, there are no cards that specifically support the Chess Archfiend series), it's still a distinct series in its own right, and we could probably justify giving it its own article.

On the other hand, there are groups of cards that are definitely a series, but don't share any common string in their Japanese names. Consider for example the "rampaging" versions of the "Charmers" ("Avalanching Aussa", "Storming Wynn", "Raging Eria", and "Blazing Hiita"): these cards definitely form their own series, because they all have the common theme of being "evolved" forms of the original "Charmers", but they could never be an archetype because they don't have any common string in their names, so a hypothetical support card would have to name each of them individually. Further, the "Charmers" and their "evolved" series (the aforementioned "rampagers", the "Familiar-Possesseds", and the "Spiritual Arts") are all part of a larger series.

For a similar example with archetypes, consider the "HEROes". This is an archetype with its own support cards, but it also has four subarchetypes ("Elemental HERO", "Destiny HERO", "Masked HERO", and "Vision HERO"), which again have their own individual support cards, and one subseries ("Evil HERO"). Even so, all of the subarchetypes and the subseries are also "HEROes", and they are all supported by "HERO" support cards.

So, to sum up: you are entirely justified in thinking that it doesn't make sense to say that e.g. "Thought Ruler Archfiend" is a "Sphere" card, or that "Necroid Shaman" is a "roid". And when you understand the distinction that we draw between archetypes and series, and why we draw that distinction, and what the implications of the distinction are, you see that you're absolutely right, because the "Spheres" and "roids" aren't just archetypes, but they are also series (but! the archetype "Sphere" is different from the series "Sphere", as is the archetype versus the series "roid"). Therefore, "Thought Ruler Archfiend" isn't actually a "Sphere" monster, in the sense that it is not part of the "Sphere" series, although it is still part of the "Sphere" archetype, and the same with "Necroid Shaman" and the "roid" archetype and series. In fact, one thought on this that I have had for some time is that there's a very strong argument for documenting archetypes on their own articles, purely as a gameplay mechanic, and series on separate articles, as a thematic group. 「ディノ奴千？！」^{? · ☎ Dinoguy1000} 22:05, August 29, 2012 (UTC)

Ok I can buy all that. It makes sense. I still will end up grinding my teeth at the sight of Jeroid and Necroid in the Vehicroids. I'll still say that cards with Spiritual and Ritual (in English or Japanese) don't belong with the Ritua cards before their names have different meanings. But now that someone has finally given me a straight answer as to why this is like it is (the discussion board showed more incomplete thoughts to make full sense) I can do like I did in musical and grin and bear it. Thank you Dino, and if you are reading this thank you as well Cheese for being patient with me when we first started this. I think I just started to go wild the moment more people entered in and "challenged" me on the topic. I'm moving your description to me talk page for a reminded on the subject matter and why it is, but feel free to remove the clutter I caused in this small feud. Good Day all. This is Rocket Knight FYI, I took so much time to read and re-read for it to sink in I just I timed out. --74.5.139.213 (talk) 23:08, August 29, 2012 (UTC)

Trust me, I'm grinding my teeth when I see stuff like that too (or laughing when its especially absurd, like "Hero's Rule 2" technically being a "Rose" card). You're welcome and no hard feelings. :) Thanks for explaining, Dino. I knew your penchant for rambling would be a good thing in this case. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 23:14, August 29, 2012 (UTC)

New note on talk page

I made a new topic about the somewhat discrepancy on "Crimson Fire" when it was used in episode 26. Can you please go to the talk page and help me get this discrepancy solved?Cardsknower (talk • contribs) 00:23, September 3, 2012 (UTC)Cardsknower

Soul Demolition's effect

I noticed you undid my edit on that page, but how the card was used in the anime slightly contradicts the real card according to the card rulings. The card rulings say that if either player has no monsters in their Graveyard, then "Soul Demolition" can't be activated. Kaiba only had three monsters in his Graveyard, so he could only use the effect three times, but he clearly used the effect five times to get rid of the Exodia parts. It would have to be changed a bit to match what was shown in the anime.Cardsknower (talk • contribs) 23:54, September 7, 2012 (UTC)Cardsknower

Like Cards said, it has a reason to be there - it only required Life Points to paying and target in the Graveyard to removing [sic]. TCG version required exact same amount of "ammo" to activate in order to targeting the deceased monsters, Anime don't. --iFredCat 23:56, September 7, 2012 (UTC)

The rules in anime do not always follow OCG/TCG. The Japanese lore of the anime card is exact the same as the OCG one. ZingerZheng (talk • contribs) 00:06, September 8, 2012 (UTC)

That's naturally what I always say; Anime break the game and rulings. --iFredCat 00:07, September 8, 2012 (UTC)

Episode 29 problem

Where does "Mystical Space Typhoon" appear in episode 29 of 5D's. I can't seem to find it anywhere in the episode.Cardsknower (talk • contribs) 05:12, September 15, 2012 (UTC)Cardsknower

It is shown on the bottom of Tetsu's Deck when he declares an attack with "Dark Diviner". ZingerZheng (talk • contribs) 15:14, September 15, 2012 (UTC)

Problem with episode 31

Is there proof that the two Spells in the second officer's hand are "Speed Spell - Vision Wind" and "Speed Spell - Accelerator Draw"?Cardsknower (talk • contribs) 00:46, September 21, 2012 (UTC)Cardsknower

No. If I was wrong, you can remove them. Sorry about that. ZingerZheng (talk • contribs) 01:48, September 21, 2012 (UTC)

Episode 40

When did the flashback with Misty and Akiza occur? I can't find it. Can you help me with this?Cardsknower (talk • contribs) 23:37, November 1, 2012 (UTC)Cardsknower

Episode 41

When does it say in this episode that the face-down cards are "Realize Defense" and "Reinforce Truth". Even though it's revealed next episode, there doesn't appear to be anything in this episode that shows what the face-down cards are.Cardsknower (talk • contribs) 02:56, November 4, 2012 (UTC)Cardsknower

Zexal Episode 78

Here are two cards, can identify these cards please. [1], [2], I will upload these images once you are done. WinterNightmare (talk • contribs) 17:54, November 4, 2012 (UTC)

Nevermind. WinterNightmare (talk • contribs) 19:08, November 4, 2012 (UTC)