User talk:Ultimate Nova X

Welcome

Hi and welcome to the Yu-Gi-Oh! wiki! Thank you for your edit to the Talk:Chaos page.

If you need help, you can consult these pages:

• Help:Contents
• Manual of style
• Chat policy

If you would like to make a suggestion or ask for assistance, feel free start a topic at the forums or contact an administrator.

Archetype/Archrelated

Please stop. I'm somewhat starting to regret telling you that info. I've already started to revert your edits, and I have issues with others. Please talk it over with me (on my Talk Page) before you start adding categories into card pages willy-nilly. For example, the Japanese name of "Jinzo #7" is merely translated as "Android". All the other "Jinzo" monsters have their Japanese card names start with "Android - Psycho (blank)". (I might be willing to relent on this). However, this is no excuse for "Spell Canceller" being related to the "Jinzo" series, apart from the fact it can prevent Spell activations and negate their effects (and it's a Machine). But it has no drastic physical similarities (which is also another factor). --UltimateKuriboh (talk • contribs) 20:30, August 28, 2013 (UTC)

I actually think "Jinzo #7" is fine, but you can't add cards as archrelated solely on the basis of effect (as you did for "Sky Scourge Invincil"). Psychical similarities, stats (meaning Level, ATK/DEF, Type, etc.) and being a required Fusion/Synchro/Xyz Material monster, English/Japanese card names, etc. are important details to consider too before you add cards as archrelated to something. --UltimateKuriboh (talk • contribs) 20:37, August 28, 2013 (UTC)

What I meant is that those characteristics are factors. Having more factors is more evidence that a card is related to an archetype/series. A card can skip all these "factors" if their name happens to be listed in a member's effect text, or is explicitly listed as a Fusion/Synchro/Xyz Material for a member of an archetype/series.

Another point. You pointed out the JWiki listed "all 3 cards" as related in the page for "Jinzo". That is 1 perspective. From another perspective, we have the JWiki page of "Sky Scourge Invincil". Conveniently, they list the "related" cards in sub-sections on that page, including something along the lines of "Spell Card negation" and "Trap Card negation". It even has a related-category for monsters that gain effects depending on the Tributes used for their Tribute Summon! By your definition, "Invincil" would be related to the "Ancient Gear" archetype by way of "Ancient Gear Gadjiltron Dragon" and "Ancient Gear Gadjiltron Chimera"!

To make myself clear, we do not run things like they do on JWiki, for better or for worse. You are also misinterpreting the fact that the cards listed as "related" on the JWiki must mean they are archrelated on this Wiki. Please note that this Wiki and the JWiki do not necessarily share the same definition. --UltimateKuriboh (talk • contribs) 04:13, August 29, 2013 (UTC)

"Lightray Sorcerer" is listed as related because it is a LIGHT counterpart of "Chaos Sorcerer". It's a 1-card away relationship. I would think "Black Luster Soldier - Envoy of the Twilight" is self-explanatory...? "[[Royal Decree]" does not count as related, since it was released in the OCG before "Jinzo" was (so the relationship was unintentional). ...However, you are now starting to bring me over to your way of thinking, because I am starting to (reluctantly) agree with you regarding "Sky Scourge Invicil" and "Spell Canceller", because it seems very likely that their effects were intentionally based on that of "Jinzo". I'd still like to wait for another person's perspective on this though. --UltimateKuriboh (talk • contribs) 14:55, August 29, 2013 (UTC)

Chaos

I've already made my arguments about how those are not the only reasons. Just cite me how the English manga is a reliable source, where and when, also, does the original Japanese manga show the same evidence? Ultimate Nova X (talk • contribs) 01:17, March 28, 2014 (UTC)

I'm not about to search up English and Japanese scans of the manga for you. However, it was during the Duelist Kingdom arc, when Yugi Tributed "Gaia The Fierce Knight" (along with 1-2 other monsters?) and declared "Gaia" was undergoing a passage of chaos to become BLS. Of course, that's why Envoy BLS is "Chaos"-themed: based on its Summon in the manga. --UltimateKuriboh (talk • contribs) 01:27, March 28, 2014 (UTC)

Here are the relevant English scans anyways (this is the official Viz manga translation I believe; Viz hasn't had the best history in translation for the YGO manga, but you will get the point). I kinda find it difficult a "Chaos" fanatic like you never even heard of the "Gaia" thing before. --UltimateKuriboh (talk • contribs) 01:41, March 28, 2014 (UTC)

No I have heard of it, just didn't think it was enough of a reason without really stopping to consider it. And I still don't think it is if we're only going by the Viz manga. But you seem pretty convinced, so I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. And admittedly, IIRC he says the same thing in the Japanese anime. So it's likely the original manga has along the same lines as well.

As a reminder, I think it should be common sense that we don't take the localized material (such as the Viz manga) as reliable evidence, like we take the original Japanese material. Ultimate Nova X (talk • contribs) 01:59, March 28, 2014 (UTC)

All right. Using what is currently on this list as a reference (the "All 'Chaos' cards" list specifically), we're going to cut the crap. "Chaos Goddess", "Elemental HERO Chaos Neos", "Light and Darkness Dragon", "Sphere of Chaos" and "Dark Magician of Chaos" are out. "White Dragon Wyverburster", "Black Dragon Collapserpent" and "Chaos Zone" are in.
Trying to narrow this down into a series that consists of cards with combined LIGHT/DARK effect or Summoning condition, as well as having something banish-related. DMoC is taken out because the little things that would attempt to qualify it (DMoC is DARK, it banishes, and it's in Invasion of Chaos, but doesn't do anything regarding LIGHT and DARK Attributes) also qualify "Witch Doctor of Chaos". Ritual BLS and vanilla "Gaia The Fierce Knight" count as related (not members), since they both have relations to Chaos members (Envoy, and the 2 LIGHT and DARK Gaias).
Please don't make any "Chaos"-related changes to card pages until this is hammered out. Questions?--UltimateKuriboh (talk • contribs) 22:15, March 28, 2014 (UTC)

I've argued about this last August already, do we really need to loop in circles again?

Dark Magician of Chaos - you forgot his important summoning card - Dedication Through Light And Darkness

Chaos Goddess - Summoning condition and effect lore.

Elemental HERO Chaos Neos - has Wind/Water and Fire/Earth attributes in the form of Elemental HERO Magma Neos and Elemental HERO Storm Neos.

Light and Darkness Dragon - Please tell me you're joking. If this is removed it's only fair that every other Dark and Light counterpart cards are removed. Plus it's Dual-type.

Sphere of Chaos - Dual type again.

Contrary to (what I suspect) you are believing, I do want this wiki to be the best it can be.

I was (originally) mostly neutral about the Ritual Chaos Soldier, and its Ritual card. If you really insist it, like you said, should be in the related section. I would gladly do all of that if you would remove the lock. Ultimate Nova X (talk • contribs) 22:30, March 28, 2014 (UTC)

What part of "don't make any "Chaos"-related changes to card pages until this is hammered out," did you not understand? --UltimateKuriboh (talk • contribs) 23:13, March 28, 2014 (UTC)

Hammered out how? And when? And shouldn't I be part of it? Ultimate Nova X (talk • contribs) 02:40, March 29, 2014 (UTC)

It's being hammered out with your arguments in mind as well. Via these discussions. That being said, you jumping ahead and editing pages before it's all settled ("hammered out") has me leaning on the "block" button, because you only seem to be following your own self-interests. I'm going to bold and italicize the following so you can understand this, ok? Do not make any "Chaos"-related edits to card pages until we say so.

Now, as I said, we don't want this "Chaos" theme being too loose, otherwise we're going to get all this random crap in there. When the average person thinks of "Chaos" in relation to Yu-Gi-Oh!, what do they think of? They think of "Chaos Sorcerer", Envoy BLS and CED, along with maybe Chaos Dragons. We're trying to establish a series that revolves around that "average, traditional" definition of Chaos (which I already defined as Summoning condition or effect that involves both LIGHT and DARK, along with banishing theme). When the average person thinks of Chaos, they don't think of "LaDD" or "Sphere of Chaos". Even though those cards are LIGHT and DARK (and accepted as a "version" of Chaos), they don't have anything to do with banishing, a given facet of "traditional Chaos" in YGO. The effect of "Chaos Hunter" lends support to this.

DMoC doesn't pass this "traditional" definition of Chaos; the "Dedication" Spell Card only mentions light and dark in name, and does nothing to involve a LIGHT Attribute with DMoC. "Chaos Neos" and "Chaos Goddess" don't fit, cuz even though LIGHT and DARK Attribute theme, they don't banish. Despite "LaDD" being made up of "Light-End Dragon" and "Dark-End Dragon" manga-wise, and being accepted as a version of "Chaos", it doesn't fit in with the "traditional" meaning of Chaos in YGO, which also involves banishing. --UltimateKuriboh (talk • contribs) 04:41, March 29, 2014 (UTC)

I apologize.

For the first paragraph, I think it might be too tight. If we go by what the audience thinks, we're kind of subject to playing a hand in keeping them close-minded. I agree that a degree of being reasonable and a line should be drawn. The LIGHT and DARK summoning condition/effect should also be extended to name as that is part of the printing of the card as well, as well as direct relations to other cards. By the way, by the summoning condition argument, Chaos Goddess does fit, ironically. If a card such as Chaos Goddess fits but cards like Black Magician of Chaos and LADD don't, I really think the criteria is too tight.

So basically, I think that obvious "LIGHT/DARK fusion" reference should be enough to get into the series.

For the second paragraph, I think if it doesn't pass the "traditional" definition, but like you said, does pass it in some other "form", then it should be in the related section if nowhere else. Similar to the ritual Chaos Soldier you're arguing for earlier.

You weren't being too nice to me yesterday, but upon reflecting, you were probably having a bad day, we all do, as we're all human. Again, sorry for being reckless.

Ultimate Nova X (talk • contribs) 05:37, March 29, 2014 (UTC)

Actually, I want to go back to the Light and Darkness Dragon argument, since you didn't comment on Light End Dragon and Dark End Dragon, I'll assume you think they deserve to stay, which I agree. However, I find there is a fatal flaw in that logic. If one deserves to be on the series just because it has a DARK/LIGHT counterpart, yet when they combine it suddenly doesn't. I find that part of the criteria to be rather too loose. If that were the case, one could almost argue that BEWD and REBD can be part of the series too, yes they don't have a fusion, but LADD isn't a fusion (in real life card game) either.

And well I think the manga universe should not be completely ruled out, the real-life card game should have a priority. Ultimate Nova X (talk • contribs) 05:52, March 29, 2014 (UTC)

I don't want to make many "exceptions" to the rule. I guess I'm okay with adding DMoC and co. as "related", since they all lack the 1 key feature (involving LIGHT and DARK, or involve banishing). LaDD and its manga components, Light and Dark-End, go as related too. And because of this, "Sphere of Chaos" and "Chaos-End Master" make their way into "related" too, since they were in same Japanese pack as Light and Dark-End. Is this ok? --UltimateKuriboh (talk • contribs) 17:10, March 29, 2014 (UTC)

We don't want to make every Lightray and/or Dark counterpart part of the series, o I agree we don't want to make too many "exceptions" to the rule. But I think if it has a "fall into one or the other, but not both" category, it should be deserving of being in the related section, especially if it has a LIGHT/DARK feature. As I don't think that rule is too permissive.

I actually didn't know about the Chaos-End Master thing until you commented on it (it's also in its trivia page), so I learned something new. And yes, I'll add that as related as well.

So it seems we have a consensus, so I'll go ahead and do the ones you agreed on myself.

What about Chaos Hunter? It's an obvious anti-Chaos card, so would that let it in?Ultimate Nova X (talk • contribs) 18:53, March 29, 2014 (UTC)

What about the lock on Chaos Soldier/Ritual? Shouldn't it be added to related? Also, should Magician of Black Chaos be added in the related in the same way that Chaos Soldier is? And why is LaDD in the Kuri series? Ultimate Nova X (talk • contribs) 19:06, March 29, 2014 (UTC)

"Demise" and "Ruin" don't belong as members or being related to Chaos. They're just opposite counterparts of each other, nothing more. They don't have anything going for them like "Chaos-End Master" or "Sphere of Chaos" do. --UltimateKuriboh (talk • contribs) 00:34, April 2, 2014 (UTC)

I thought there was a glitch or something, since I saw their ritual card still on the list. But, in addition to being opposite counterparts, they were made to mimic a weaker version of Envoy of the Beginning/End, would that not be enough to qualify? Ultimate Nova X (talk • contribs) 01:01, April 2, 2014 (UTC)

Weak speculation, unfortunately. I mean, it's notable enough to be put on their trivia pages if it's not there already, but there's no solid reasoning other than their effects and Attributes.

As to "Black Magician of Chaos" and its Ritual, just wait a while. --UltimateKuriboh (talk • contribs) 03:14, April 2, 2014 (UTC)

I think they have a reasonable case since my weak speculation is only because they're Ritual monsters. Which means their summoning conditions is really the only thing that's not letting them in. They're polar opposites with the same Ritual card that mimics the effects of Beginning/End, Ruin inherits half and Enrise inherits the other half. Demise also has 終焉 in its name, just like CED. I think they have a better case than Chaos-End Master, Chaos Soldier, and Magician of Black Chaos do actually.

I think the main reason is they are (and they're meant to be) the polar opposites with mimicking effects. They'd be too similar to the Tenmashin had they had similar summoning conditions, and imposing summoning conditions on top of ritual summons is rather crippling. So really, the only reason you argue they can't be on the list is because of the limitations of the game. Which I don't think is a fair reason to kick them out.

So I don't think adding them in would be making an exception, even if you do, I would still say it's a good one to make.

Oh yeah, and you saw that thing I wrote on the other talk page, I presume, so it's one of those things that'll fix itself, thanks.Ultimate Nova X (talk • contribs) 03:47, April 2, 2014 (UTC)

RE:Card templates at the bottom still missing cards

The reason cards list other cards' relations to themselves, along with their appropriate relations to other cards, on their own card page, is because they are directly inserted there (by editors). The templates on the other hand, contain automatically generated results based on cards that are marked as part of that series/archetype (the editors mark the cards as being part of a series/archetype, but it is up to the template to display those cards on pages which the template is used). Semantic MediaWiki (SMW) handles this "automatic" process. However, SMW is being abandoned by Wiki, and thus there is no more technical support working on it. So with new updates to the Wiki, glitches eventually result with SMW. There is going to be no immediate fix to this. We're most likely going to switch over to another thingie in the future that templates will rely on. --UltimateKuriboh (talk • contribs) 02:06, August 30, 2014 (UTC)