This discussion has been moved to Forum:Discussing "related" games.

While I'm out calling out the relevancy of non-FF pages, I'll do this one, too. This page only mentions similar names for items and enemies in passing. That's not even enough to put into trivia sections. I think as the "Final Fantasy Wiki" we really should keep things to FF and related media. Any relevant info in this page to our scope could more than easily be put as bullet points on FF pages. I'd like to motion that we get rid of this page. Bluestarultor Best-of Stellar Arena sigicon BSA 20:49, April 23, 2011 (UTC)

I've heard this game features several monsters present in Final Fantasy and that's that. It'd be best to clear out what the connections are before chopping it off. - Henryacores^ 23:17, April 23, 2011 (UTC)
Don't get me wrong. Of course I'm not saying to toss out any relevant info. We just need to extract the baby from the bath water, here. My opinion is we're keeping a lot of information we really don't need. I never said we wouldn't save what we still want. I'm just not seeing all that much in specifics. That's the problem. We have a page on a non-FF game on the wiki because a few sentences vaguely mention there's FF stuff in it. If there's info I missed, then we should extract it before going any further. Bluestarultor Best-of Stellar Arena sigicon BSA 23:59, April 23, 2011 (UTC)
I understood it in the first place. What I mean is that if a game has a deep connection with the FF Series, like Super Mario RPG, it should be featured here too. Remember that in the past we had full coverage of Kingdom Hearts, which was sent to Kingdom Hearts Wiki after a split, and later our small coverage on Chrono Trigger (We only had the game's page, and of Chrono Trigger alone, not even Chrono Cross) was also deleted. - Henryacores^ 01:20, April 24, 2011 (UTC)
The question is how we define "deep." I disagree with us keeping a Mario page that it's clear someone else already has info on over, to be blunt, some pretty broad class archetypes that no one really owns at this point stretched into muddied FF classes and a boss with crystals, with a peppering of other things that could easily be bullet points in other articles. I've also motioned to start up a real discussion on that, since the talk page literally has something from every year from 2007 to the present asking why the page exists and I think it's time we sat down and actually talked about it instead of shooting dissent down on sight. On this one, my brother owned Gyromancer and I have to say that sharing a few item and monster names is being played generously in this article's right to stay here. In truth most enemies of FF aren't really "FF enemies." Short of a few iconic ones, you're really looking at things from folklore or real animals for the most part. The iconic ones could be noted. Heck, if you really want to be picky, items could be noted, although nobody really owns things like Remedies and to be frank no one ever did. As a wiki for FF, we really should be trying to pare down these articles for the sake of focus and because we're storing some pretty generous amounts of info that doesn't have any connection whatsoever to the FF series. Bluestarultor Best-of Stellar Arena sigicon BSA 04:49, April 24, 2011 (UTC)

But Gyromancer does have several of those "iconic" enemies. And sure, FF didn't invent the concept of, say, Behemoths or Ahrimans, but it certainly has its own unique design of them not found in other games with enemies drawing from the same mythos. Yes, Sahagins came from D&D, but Sahagins as bipedal turtles with lances? That's an FF original. Behemoth may be a Biblical creature, but the Biblical creature is not a purple lion with bull horns and a dragon tail.

But I'm getting off track here. Either way, if it's made by Square, has itens and spells named after FF items and spells, and features FF-exclusive enemies, it's a "related game." Just like Bahamut Lagoon. Just like the Chocobo Dungeon and Racing games. Blood of Bahamut. And the best example IMO, Lord of Vermillion. We should by no means have an article on all of the individual enemies and characters and details from these games, but covering them in an overview is certainly within our scope. I do find it odd that we cover Dragon Quest, though. The only connection these games have is through a crossover game. That's like saying we need an article on Super Mario Bros. because Mario and Black Mage appear together in Hoops. Dazuro 04:58, April 24, 2011 (UTC)

The irony is that we don't have an article on Hoops despite having one on SM RPG and someone already pointed out as much on that talk page. That's rather much my point is that this is info that can easily go into a trivia or "outside FF" section being collected on individual game pages with no rhyme or reason. Either we start paring down the ridiculous amounts of info we're keeping on games with a few FF references in them or we get busy becoming a wiki with pages on a lot more than we already have and making people wonder why we can call ourselves "Final Fantasy Wiki" with a straight face. All-or-nothing? Yes, but otherwise we look hypocritical. Bluestarultor Best-of Stellar Arena sigicon BSA 05:13, April 24, 2011 (UTC)

Then Hoops definitely needs an article, I'd say... Also, we have articles on both Lords of Vermilion games, but not on Lords of Arcana, and only one article for Kingdom Hearts, despite there being sequels with just as much FF involvement. According to precedent, shouldn't LOV2 be deleted and LOV1 be made into a parent page of sorts? Dazuro 05:17, April 24, 2011 (UTC)

Hold your horses on that until we decide a direction. That's what I'm calling into question here. If you'll look in the SM RPG talk page, I just pretty much destroyed most of the reasoning for keeping it. Bluestarultor Best-of Stellar Arena sigicon BSA 05:38, April 24, 2011 (UTC)
Make a topic in the forums. This is just sprawling between different talk pages now. Maybe ask for admins' input? I think the FF series is so big already with all the spin-offs and whatever that keeping only vaguely related "related games" is not worth it. Enemies and items we can probably been said are Square Enix staples rather than Final Fantasy staples. I say only keep the "obvious" ones. OK so Vagrant Story is canon in Ivalice chronology, elements of it can be seen in other Ivalice games, KH has Final Fantasy characters and Final Fantasy music in it, Chocobo series is a spin-off of the Final Fantasy series, Ehrgeiz has Final Fantasy characters as playable characters and even Cloud on the boxart.Keltainentoukokuu 05:48, April 24, 2011 (UTC)

Blood of Bahamut should be part of our scope. It features creatures like Ifrit, Alexander, Shiva, Gilgamesh, Fenrir and even the Knights of the Round. All of those are traditional Final Fantasy summons, and specially Knights of the Round. As of Lord of Vermillion, I despite featuring special cards from the Final Fantasy series, the first installment also features several Valkyrie Profile characters, so I don't believe it's that centered in our series. It sounds more like content for Square Wiki. - Henryacores^ 18:53, April 24, 2011 (UTC)

Dead link Edit

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

--intangir bot (master) 02:20, June 30, 2014 (UTC)