Talk: Garnet Til Alexandros XVII

Take a good look. Isn't it beautiful?
	Behold! This article has been chosen as the Featured Article of August, 2011!
	Even so, if you wish to improve the article, do not hesitate! You can also nominate your favorite articles to be featured here!

Garnet is the heroine of FF9, she's in most of the FMV's and she's definitely Zidane's co-star. So please stop changing it to main female protagonist. It means the same thing. =) -Eileen

See AK's talkpage for my view on this. I'm going to try and stay out of this one. Crazyswordsman 20:54, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm reverting it back to heroine because she and Zidane are the characters focused on the most, and no one's objective. We all have our own opinions. Besides people say heroine when referring to female leads not "female protagonist" which as I said before in Garnet's case is the same as heroine. (I know this is not always true) Here's some food for thought: if Garnet's not the heroine then who is? Eiko or Freya? -Eileen-

Here's some more food for thought (since you like saying that so much):

1. You've said in this very discussion (emphasis added): "Garnet is the heroine of FF9, she's in most of the FMV's and she's definitely Zidane's co-star. So please stop changing it to main female protagonist. It means the same thing." If this is true, why do you then constantly revert it back? If it's really the same thing, main female protagonist is at least as good as heroine. But we (several users) have already said why we prefer protagonist over hero/heroine, and also that we do it to remain consistent and at least attempt to stay as objective as possible. (And on a sidenote, protagonist and hero(ine) not the entirely same thing, which has also been explained in a discussion you've started).
2. You've also said: "I respect your position even if it's in the minority." But it seems more and more clear that you don't, since you keep doing what we constantly tell you not to. Stop changing it to heroine, many of us are seriously tired and annoyed with it. And regard it as a final warning, before I am forced to take action. We're just as tired of reverting it as we are of constantly telling you that we prefer protagonist (if not more).

--Hecko X 03:04, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't want to get too involved in this, but I'll throw my two cents in. I consider Garnet the heroine of Final Fantasy IX. That is my opinion. Somebody else could perhaps argue that they think that Eiko is the heroine, for whatever reason. That is their opinion. Regardless, it is all an opinion.

A protagonist is the leading character of a story, whereas a hero/ine is an individual of distinguished courage or ability, admired for his brave deeds and noble qualities. Bravery is opinionated, and therefore cannot be used to describe this character. This Wikia is subjective, and the articles need to reflect that. You can create an account and claim that your favorite heroine is Garnet, because that is your page and you can state opinions.

As for this article, we need facts. Garnet is a lead character in the story, so we should keep her listed as a "Main Female Protaganist." Savvy? --Blykus 03:13, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

I didn't want to start an edit war or tick anyone off but main female protagonist really bothers me, because it is like downgrading Garnet's importance as in FF9. What's wrong with the phrase heroine? It would be her. Why don't we just come to this agreement, call the hero's protagonists and the leading women heroines? Since a lot of other sources say that including Wikipedia. You can check it out if you want. -Eileen-

You can't really get any more important than actually being a main protagonist. And once again, the problem with calling her heroine is that it isn't objective. We don't want to play favorites in articles, since, like Blykus said, people might consider someone else as the hero/heroine than the character "we" have chosen. Like many people consider Zidane to be the hero of the story, but almost just as many say the same about Vivi. By simply calling them protagonists, all the characters are on equal terms and we don't step on other people's toes (by playing favorites). And fyi, I did check out the wiki, and guess what I noticed. Out of all the FF-games, the only (and I really want to stress that word) one's where the main protagonists were refered to as hero/heroine, where the one's that you have contributed to. Now isn't that a funny coincidence..? So just for fun, I cross-referenced with other games (I like to be thorough, it could have been a fluke after all), and I noticed the funniest thing. Not a single main protagonist was called "hero" or "heroine", but guess what the were called. That's right, "main protagonist", "main character" (a synonym for "main protagonist") or simply "player character". In all cases, objective terms, and in none of the cases hero/heroine. --Hecko X 20:47, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I understand your point although I still disagree. Could you keep the other articles as they are and I promise I won't change this one? -Eileen-

I can't promise that other users, e.g. Tactics, AK or someone completely else, won't change heroine back to female protagonist, but sure, I won't touch much else, unless I know of/can find in-game stuff that contradicts it. --Hecko X 08:32, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

All right that's cool. -Eileen-

Love

I don't understand why someone reverted that Garnet loves Zidane back to "Although she seems to dislike Zidane, her "rescuer" at first, she later seems to develop great fondness for him." So can we leave that as it is? - Eileen-

Quoted dialog to back it up:
Steiner: "Red Rose!? Could it be...Beatrix!?"
Zidane: "Quite a woman, you fell in love with!"
Steiner: "You're one to talk!"
Dagger: "Wait a minute, Steiner! What did you mean by that!?"
Zidane: "...Alright! Let's bust through!"
--Hecko X 01:27, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Hecko, you really like that quote don't you? I agree by the way; both articles should be changed back to love as opposed to fondness.--Goldberry2000 12:07, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Not really, I went through a couple of hundred pages of game-script (297 to be exact, and I didn't receive a single word of gratitude...) to find something that could support or oppose the adding of "loves" instead of "has feelings for". After finding this, I didn't bother with the last 300 pages, as I thought this was good enough. --Hecko X 14:18, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for finding it Hecko. That was really awesome. -Eileen-

No worries ^_^ --Hecko X 08:32, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Is this supposed to prove you guys can read whatever you want between the lines? --TacticAngel 07:28, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

TA, you're probably the only one who doesn't think Zidane and Garnet are in love. --Crazyswordsman 07:30, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't write articles on speculation and inference. You can do whatever you want though. --TacticAngel 07:35, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Is the ending FMV not enough for you TA?--Goldberry2000 20:00, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Right on Goldberry! Hopefully he's convinced. -Eileen-

Garnet's Job Class

Hey instead of calling her Summoner/White Mage, why not "White Summoner"? It fits.
--LuvLuv G2000 03:04, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

But it's not really an existing job, now is it?

--Hecko X 07:26, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Hecko. It's a good idea but doesn't quite fit so I'm reverting it.

-Eileen-

You are right. My mistake. I almost made it look like one of those fan-sites, and that's what we're definately not supposed to do. I apologize. I still say Square should be like "Huzzah! Let's make fusion Job Classes for the Job lovers!" but sadly, they blocked my email.... >.>;;

--LuvLuv G2000 02:02, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

It's ok. I reverted it. Although, I agree that "Square should be like "Huzzah! Let's make fusion Job Classes for the Job lovers!" would be entertaining. Too bad it didn't happen =)

-Eileen-

Her main job class is definitely Summoner, White Mage is sort of like a "subjob", despite the cloak she wears in the cutscene of the escape from the castle.

		Hecko Xtalk - blog - anime rants 22:38, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
		Why do you think Summoner is mentioned before White Mage in her infobox..?

Heroine Source

Garnet's profile on Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Characters_of_Final_Fantasy_IX

Wikipedia is very unreliable. --Crazyswordsman 20:34, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

I checked out the link.

For the sake of argument, do not change this back to "heroine". I want to see how long it takes for someone else to do it, i.e. not you Elis. --Hecko X 20:52, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

It was changed back by an IP. Until I get proof otherwise, I'm going to accuse Eileen of changing it back. In fact, I'm going to ask the people at the 'Kipedia what they think about this crap. --Crazyswordsman 22:44, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

A cigar for the winner! Congrats my good man, you are correct. --Hecko X 23:02, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

I found out that it WAS Eileen. Apparently they're having to deal with the same Eileen over there. I'm going to extend Eileen's ban for trying to use her own Wikipedia edits as proof of something. --Crazyswordsman 23:50, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Damn, I can't extend her ban. --Crazyswordsman 23:55, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Well... sure it was Eileen, kind of the reason for me saying "you are correct"... --Hecko X 05:55, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

As senior Eileen banner, what you can do is either reban her for a longer period of time or unban and reban her. In any case... I've been trying to not seem like a jerk because I think you like her more than I do, CSM, but I find this all very frustrating. --TacticAngel 10:24, 23 March 2007 (UTC) RE: Self... I can't figure out how to unblock a user. You're lucky all the other CSMs showed when I could figure that out. --TacticAngel 10:38, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

I figured out how to unblock someone (no, I didn't unban Eileen). What I'm trying to do NOW, though, is getting the rollback rights granter to work so Diablo, AK, Lycentia, and Goldberry can get Rollback access. --Crazyswordsman 15:33, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Awesome. I know it reverts an edit, but how does it differ from how we revert edits currently? Diablocon 15:37, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

You click one link instead of two. I shit you not, it is the only real difference. --Hecko X 15:53, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

The rollback access machine isn't working. It says "there's no Diablocon" every time. --Crazyswordsman 17:48, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

That's a little unnerving. Have you tried everyone else? Diablocon 17:59, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Maybe you need to input "User:Diablocon", and not just "Diablocon" (I'm guessing). --Hecko X 19:57, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

That doesn't work. And I've tried all four of you. --Crazyswordsman 20:42, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Sorry guys, I didn't find Hecko's message until after I made the change so I apologize. -Eileen-

Why?

Why did you move the page to a grammatically incorrect title? StijnX 18:47, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Because she's determined to get her own way, no matter what anyone says. --Lycentia 19:44, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Did it by accident. Pressed the wrong button. -Eileen-

Repeatedly? StijnX 21:22, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Then I had to change it back to what it was before. -Eileen-

Page Renaming

		DrakemasterDrake - "I would rather live a short life of glory than a long one of obscurity." TALK - {{{time}}} The clock on this site is so messed up, why bother?
		This page's name should be changed to Princess Garnet 'til Alexandros XVII.

http://i683.photobucket.com/albums/vv200/Henryacores/Gilgy_Sprite.png

		Henryacores - "É que esta noite vou lançar ao mar/A bruma que houver em mim./Vou beber e cantar este luar/vou dançar até ao fim." TALK - 12:58, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
		Shouldn't the "Princess" part be removed intirely??

		Yuan 翠珊 — 06:22, 23 October 2008 (UTC) "He wants to write a love song / An anthem of forgiving / A manual for living with defeat"
		I believe the policy is to give the character their full names and title for the page name, if it has been stated within canon materials.

Shrine

Should we really have a link to an internet shrine on here? They add little to the page and can come across has rather tacky. Not to mention the rabid fans that are usually behind these things. Exdeath64 19:22, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Trivia

Hey guys, the "Garnet is the only character in Final Fantasy IX who is playable prior to being named by the player. Instead, she is named after crossing the Ice Cavern, when she takes an alias of the player's choosing." is incorrect since you start off with vivi being called ???? and Pointy-Hat-Boy and he's well playable.

Actually if you think about it, it is correct insofar as when vivi is called ????, he isn't playable in a fight back then. Therefore I think that's what it meant by "playable prior to being named by the player". As a consequence, in my mind, this quote should be put again.

Image overload

Methinks you need a gallery. 134.225.177.94 20:01, October 13, 2009 (UTC)

No gallery on earth can hold her hotness =P (On a more serious note: thanks) What more can I say? 05:44, December 6, 2009 (UTC)

Garnet vs Dagger

Since it seems to have been brought up, what are the thoughts on using Garnet or Dagger for her gameplay sections? It was mentioned by JBed aka Mr. Anon that Dagger is the default named used when naming her. However, in this case there's a difference with other characters - Garnet is explicitly said to be an alias she's taking, and other characters still refer to her as Garnet at times. That said, to use both Dagger and Garnet would be confusing to readers and editors, unless there's a specific pattern JBed would like to point out that he believes should be used.

What do you guys think? Doreiku Kuroofangu 13:42, October 6, 2011 (UTC)

Garnet for the whole sections because it's her name. Otherwise what's to stop people from using Sara because that's her real name? AmbieSushi To think that mother would prefer Sephiroth over... 13:44, October 6, 2011 (UTC)

When writing storyline sections, people are free to refer to characters by whatever name they would like. There might be editors who say "we should refer to her as Princess Garnet til Alexandros XVII" on the first mention and "Garnet" on all others", but we don't have any strict rules. And there isn't really a need to, people who write stories can switch between names at will.

But beyond a point, in battles Dagger is always called Dagger. Calling her otherwise wouldn't be correct. Just as we refer to Scarlet Hair as Scarlet Hair when he does things in that battle, we should refer to Garnet as Dagger when talking about her in a gameplay sense. 79.69.195.227 14:11, October 6, 2011 (UTC)

I should also add, that this "confusion" doesn't happen that often. Sections on this page are largely split into sections regarding story, and sections regarding gameplay. Information in Trivia, and in the Infobox will have different things depending on the situation, however the rest of the sections are clear. Her abilities and equipment are clearly about Gameplay, so should use Dagger; and her story section is clearly about story, so shouldn't have the restriction. On other articles, such as List of Abilities, Weapons, and stuff, Dagger should be used because weapons are equipped to the character called "Dagger". On enemy pages, if there is a story section then she may be referred to as Garnet there, but if she is involved in battle tactics, it should be Dagger if that is what she is called by default during that battle. And on articles regarding storyline, such as Battle of Lindblum, she doesn't have to be called Dagger because it doesn't refer to her in a gameplay sense, but from a storyline perspective. These are two concise differences.

These are differences we use with every character. Cloud can be called "Cloud Strife" in story section, but it would be incorrect to do so in gameplay. Same goes for "Kimahri Ronso", the Ronso extension should be left out when referring to him in a gameplay perspective. And Ashelia B'nargin Dalmasca should only be Ashe in battles.

And if you want a similar character, when Hooded Man is in TAY, we call him Hooded Man. Therefore, in Ceodore's Tale, the Cross Slash band is with Ceodore and Hooded Man, not Ceodore and Kain. 79.69.195.227 14:20, October 6, 2011 (UTC)

Garnet is called Garnet in battles before you name her.Keltainentoukokuu 15:55, October 6, 2011 (UTC)

Copy and pasted prior discussion:

---

It doesn't have to be her real name. It is her default gameplay name. It's the same for Ashelia B'nargin Dalmasca. Whenever referring to her in battles, she must be called "Ashe", because that is her gameplay name.

Storyline, Garnet can be called whatever she wants. But when referring to her menu portraits or her in battle, we call her what she is called in those situations. Her default gameplay name is Dagger, so we call her Dagger in those situations. Garnet cannot summon Atomos, because at that point in the game, no character has the name "Garnet" as their default gameplay name. 79.69.195.227 12:02, October 6, 2011 (UTC)

Okay, here's the deal: As I mentioned in my recent revert, she is called "Garnet" in battle, prior to the name change. For example, she is known as "Garnet" in the fight with Steiner and in the Evil Forest. I haven't played XII yet, so I can't say much on your example, and I'll head you off before we start quoting the Manuel of Style or something: That thing has been outdated for years, though I believe a movement has been adopted by some of the admins to rewrite it.

Anyway, as she is called both Garnet and Dagger in battle, both COULD be used to describe her in terms of gameplay. However by calling her "Garnet" throughout, we have the consistency, and it should be clear to any newcomers what name should be used when describing her. Likeacupcake 12:08, October 6, 2011 (UTC)

I am well aware Dagger is called "Garnet" before the player names her. But then I am also well aware that Cloud is called "Ex-SOLDIER" before the player names him, and Terra is called ?????? before the player names her.

Therefore in situations that can refer to the character either before or after naming them, we use the name used after. In situations exclusive to the character before they are named, we use the name used before. This makes sense.

The above all refers to gameplay situations. We can use "Garnet" in non-gameplay situations because she is not tied to a fixed name in non-gameplay situations.

You talk about consistency. The reason we use "Aeris" instead of "Aerith" across all mentions of VII is because that is what she is called in that situation. This inconsistency is a sensible rule as it refers to what they are called in the particular situation. It's not an inconsistency if we have a clear cut reason for calling her one thing in one situation, and different in another. That's not confusing. And also, for out of gameplay/in storyline things we may call her whatever we want. Princess Garnet til Alexandros XVII, Princess Garnet, Garnet. Don't get me started on how pages like Cave of the Gi go between "Nanaki" and "Red XIII".

For another example, the Scarlet Hair (boss), when referring to him as the enemy he is, only calls him "Scarlet Hair". We don't call him "Amarant" in this situation because that is not his name during this battle.

And Dagger is already used in at least some articles. First place I went is Trance Kuja and it said "Dagger". You may revert my edits, but you have a mission ahead of you if you want to change all instances to Garnet: Final Fantasy IX abilities. All I was doing was making the two articles in question consistent. 79.69.195.227 12:32, October 6, 2011 (UTC)

Okay, the thing I was pointing out with Garnet being called Garnet in battle before being "named", was to point out both would be valid for gameplay descriptions. You mentioned Cloud and Terra's "names" before being named, this would make them valid for gameplay descriptions, however Could/Terra is called Cloud/Terra after that point, hence it would be inconsistant to have both names.

The Aeris/Aerith debate is a very old one, that is still archived on Talk:Aerith Gainsborough. I'll leave you to wade through the mess if you want the specifics on the debate, but suffice to say that there was strong enough reasoning on both sides that a compromise was set in place (One that to this day still creates a divide among some editors).

The consistence on articles is in the domain of editors referred to as "Wiki Gnomes", Gnoming is something that drives me up the wall: Small, repetitive changes that are often just for tidiness, but mostly for the reasons we are discussing here. If I could work up the effort, I may even do some of it myself, but like I said: It's not really the job for me.

As for Amarant's boss fight, it is an enemy, and hence we use the in game name for that fight, but note that we use Amarant for all other occurrences, including when he is Mirrored. I think that's everything you mentioned... Likeacupcake 12:56, October 6, 2011 (UTC)

For Cloud and Terra we obviously refer to them as Cloud and Terra because that is their gameplay name throughout the main part of the game.

I am aware of the Aeris/Aerith debate. As I said, the reason we call Aerith "Aeris Gainsborough" and "Aeris" when it comes to VII is because that is her name in that situation. If we apply the same logic through to this, she is called "Dagger" in the main portion of gameplay, so in those situations we should refer to her as "Dagger".

Yes, Scarlet Hair is a boss. I know. That was the point. He is a boss, and that is his name. Therefore when referring to him in that battle, we use "Scarlet Hair". When referring to Garnet's second menu portrait, it only makes sense to call her "Dagger".

The point is "to call them as they are called" when it comes to anything gameplay. Yes, we have the Garnet/Dagger overlaps, just as we have the Ex-SOLDIER/Cloud overlaps, and the ??????/Terra overlaps. In these situations it is best to use the name after they have been officially named. When she is known as "Garnet", she will never summon Atomos, but she may cast "Cure". When she "Dagger", she can both summon Atomos and cast Cure. Dagger is the more sensible name. 79.69.195.227 13:23, October 6, 2011 (UTC)

---

I'm on a bit of a sugar high at the moment, so I'm not sure a whole lot of what I say will be coherant, let alone spelled correctly. I'll check in when I've settled down a bit! Likeacupcake 16:01, October 6, 2011 (UTC)

Adding to trivia

Just wondering before I consider adding it in...but when I was grinding like a boss around Treno, Garnet ended up with 96 MP at level 17, thus being able to cast Shiva. There's nothing in the trivia section explaining what level she gains enough MP at, just that she is able to use her Eidolons from the beginning. Is it relevant to add anything? Tia-Lewise 14:46, November 20, 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure if MP progression is predictable in this game, but yes, it would be nice information to have. 79.69.207.29 15:26, November 20, 2011 (UTC)

MP gain by level is random I'm afraid. I've been to level 21 and still not enough MP to cast Shiva...(very near to, though)Keltainentoukokuu 16:38, November 20, 2011 (UTC)

Ah. Alright, fair enough. I thought it was one of those games...then I must be a lucky bugger, eh? Tia-Lewise 10:08, November 22, 2011 (UTC)

"Til"

In the game she introduces herself as "Princess Garnet Til Alexandros, heir to the throne of Alexandria."

So I assume "til" isn't capitalised in the Ultimania... wait... what am I talking about, I have the IX Ultimania.

In it she is called "Garnet Til Alexandros 17th"

So our two greatest sources for names both capitalise "Til". Unless there was a more recent Ultimania I don't know about. why is "til" not capitalised in the title? JBed 15:05, July 8, 2012 (UTC)

Hmm, interesting that no one's pointed it out before.Keltainentoukokuu 16:23, July 8, 2012 (UTC)

All other websites call her Garnet Til Alexandros. Hmm... Cat (meow ∙ hunt) 22:18, July 9, 2012 (UTC)

EDIT 22:25, July 9, 2012 (UTC) Scroll down to the bottom of this. It used to be Garnet Til Alexandros XVII, until somebody named Eris moved it. Looking at Eris's talk page, on the day of the move Crazyswords told her not to move something then move it back. Apparently he didn't realize she decapitalized it in doing so. Move back, I think -- I'll do it later if nobody else does, but I'm not really in the mood to fix a bunch of links right now. :/

So the wiki has just being retarded in not capitalising her middle name for so long? Wahey! I can't move it. For some reason it won't let users move over redirects, while other times it does.

This is one of those times it doesn't. I'm not sure if mods have special rights that allows them to move over redirects. JBed (talk) 22:29, July 9, 2012 (UTC)

No we don't. Cat (meow ∙ hunt) 22:32, July 9, 2012 (UTC)

Birthday

How much are we sure that her given birthday is her birthday and not the deceased Princess's? She took the place of the deceased Princess, right?—Kaimi (999,999 CP/5 TP) 08:16, March 29, 2013 (UTC)

Let's see, it's a date taken from Ultimania, on her personal timeline, so beyond 100% certain. -- Some Color Mage ~ (Talk) 08:29, March 29, 2013 (UTC)

So she shares her birthday with the deceased Princess, then? You know, the King and the Queen must have surely had birthday parties for the deceased Princess; she didn't die straight after her birth, but few years later. Then again, the game doesn't really reveal much about the deceased Princess. Or Sarah and Garnet share the exact same day of their birthdays?—Kaimi (999,999 CP/5 TP) 08:35, March 29, 2013 (UTC)