Zoids Wiki

Welcome to Zoids Wiki. You may wish to create or login to an account in order to have full editing access to this wiki.

READ MORE

Zoids Wiki
Register
(There are faithful and fluent translations.)
m (signature)
Line 760: Line 760:
 
Point 5. Let me re-quote the exact text I used before: ''Names can be subject to even more variation, '''with spellings depending on the individual's preference'''. For example, the manga artist Yasuhiro Nightow's family name would be more conventionally written in Hepburn romanization as Naitō.''
 
Point 5. Let me re-quote the exact text I used before: ''Names can be subject to even more variation, '''with spellings depending on the individual's preference'''. For example, the manga artist Yasuhiro Nightow's family name would be more conventionally written in Hepburn romanization as Naitō.''
   
Point 6 and 7. Your definitions of Romanisation and Translation aren't correct. "published Japanese media which uses English letters" is listed in the rules, and is sufficient.
+
Point 6 and 7. Your definitions of Romanisation and Translation aren't correct. "published Japanese media which uses English letters" is listed in the rules, and is sufficient. [[User:Sylvanelite|Sylvanelite]] 21:38, April 10, 2011 (UTC)

Revision as of 21:38, 10 April 2011

Lock

The main rules page has been locked. As they impact every contributor, rules are not something that should be changed regularly, regardless of how small the changes may be. Changes to the rules will only be made after extensive discussion. Feel free to discuss the rules on this talk page, all members are welcome to voice their opinions on either the existing rules, or propose alternative rules. Sylvanelite 13:15, April 9, 2011 (UTC)

Rationale

  • 1-Naming: Romanisations do not take into account spelling or grammar, or other such context that makes the name correct to an English-speaker. They are simply Japanese words written with English letters, and as such, are unreliable. Unofficial translations are subjective and often contradict one another, and therefore cannot be reliably cited.
This Wiki revolves around the use of many different contributors and users. This is the reason why popularity is a useful and reliable criteria for picking the naming convention.
  • 2-Notability: If something is difficult to navigate it becomes difficult to edit and information becomes unreliable (for instance, if an article is unnecessarily long, a new page splitting up the content makes it much easier to check the correctness of). If a new page only contains repeated information, then to edit one page requires a user to edit two pages, obviously reducing the integrity of the wiki. If a new page does not contain information, then if, in future, someone wants to make the same page, they first have to find the old page and bring it to conform with their future page, making edits more difficult, and thus should be avoided (as well as making problems with navigation).
  • 3-Speculation cannot be cited, by definition, and therefore cannot be taken as fact. Furthermore, official material is not made to be robust to inferences made by its fans (it is made to be entertaining), and therefore, no matter how common-sense the speculation is, it is unreliable, and should not be used.
  • 4-There is no universal fan group for Zoids, so information about fans cannot be cited and is therefore not wiki-worthy (Note that this is distinct from, say, information about the popularity of the franchise, as this can be cited, for instance, by sales data).
Please note that these rules may be subject to change. For the relevant discussion on them, please see This forum topic.

A quick question. What do we do if somthing is implied or hinted, and how would we write that down? (Zoids Fanatic 23:55, June 29, 2010 (UTC))

I kinda want to use the forum to discuss this, and leave this page with naught but the rationale, but until an admin come along and sorts it out, there's no harm done. Anyway, it depends on exactly what it is you're talking about, I can't say without context, because if it is implied but the viewer must make the jump, then don't mention it, but if it is implied outright in-context, then just say that "X was implied by Y". Slax01 01:06, June 30, 2010 (UTC)

Well, let's hope the relationship sections are fine then. (Zoids Fanatic 01:13, June 30, 2010 (UTC))

What if the only "official" translation is clearly wrong? For example, the box of Elephantus calls it "Elepantus", the Sauro Knights box calls it "Ssauro Knights" and the manual of Airsplitter calls it "Air Spliter". Also, I haven't seen any official translation of Will's name (the hero of Saga Fuzors) - does that mean we should romanize it and call him "Wiru"? In cases like that, I suggest the "unofficial" translation takes priority over the romanization if there is no conflict (i.e. only one "unofficial" translation). Cheironyx 10:00, March 1, 2011 (UTC)

"In the event of two official translations existing, if common sense does not resolve the conflict" I'm pretty sure common sense can be employed here. Besides, most of those that you have listed don't have only one official translation (notwithstanding the fact that most of what you've listed are romanisations and not translations (according to wiki definitions) anyway). Elephantus needs to be checked out (I could only find the one box, according to the wiki it was re-released with a different box, and the one manual I found was too low resolution to read), Sauro knights is spelt that way on the back of the box, Airsplitter (I don't know what this is, but either way) you have implied that the box contradicts the manual- if so, then there isn't only one translation and finally, with "Will" if there's no official romanisation or translation, we are free to use anything we wish. If the official (ie: published) romanisation is "wiru" then yes, we do use that, but I'd want to see the source first. Slax01 11:02, March 1, 2011 (UTC)

Elephantus is consistently spelled without an "h" on the original and Memorial Box versions - in fact, every Japanese site calls it "Elepantus" as well. The box of Airsplitter (a limited edition Custom Blox) doesn't have the name in English anywhere, and again, all the Japanese sites call it "Air Spliter". I hadn't looked at the back of the Sauro Knights box, sorry about that. Finally, you might want to change the page to official romanisation > unofficial translation. Even so, there are characters like Störmer and Shuu who do have one official romanisation - "Sheterma" and "Syuw". I really wouldn't want to use those XP

P.S. "Information about fans" may be unreliable, but information about any particular fan or any fan-made game/custom/art can be cited just fine. The fan-made materials might be worth mentioning just to show people that they aren't official (e.g. mention Shield Liger Assault at the bottom of the List of Games page so people won't mistake it for an official game). Cheironyx 01:48, March 2, 2011 (UTC)

@elephantus: I only wonder what the OAR name was (as the article states it was repackaged) but otherwise, if consistent, then the page, indeed, should be changed to "Elepantus". Either way, the name Elepantus should be mentioned in the article.
@Airsplitter, again, if consistent, we use what the official media use.
@Romanisations, I thought I had put in a definition, but I guess they didn't make it off the draft page, so I've updated it accordingly, thanks for pointing that out.
@fan-made, if fan sections are to be made I suggest some things:
1- keep it to a single page, perhaps multiple pages, such as one for websites, one for custom models, etc, but VERY strictly enforce the content being kept on these pages ONLY, so that we don't get a repeat of people inserting nonsense into articles as has happened many times in the past. (and good lord it took alot of work to get rid of). The purpose of these pages would have to be very clear.
2- I am VERY adverse to putting any kind of fan material into existing pages, even with strict rules and sections, for many reasons, not least of which is past experience.
3- I am adverse to putting info about specific people up, as this can invade privacy and/or lead to ego trips/flame wars when people don't get the recognition they deserve, or someone else gets more than themselves. Even statements as simple as "this was done by X" can cause hell to break loose.
4- We can't be sure of who's posting what, so if we post a creation without the right to, many (significant) problems can be created, especially with the possibility of imposters. I'd want disclaimers and stuff, because experience has told me that the Zoids community in particular is quite strict when it comes to these kinds of things.

These are just some of the issues with fanpages. I must note that there are certainly advantages to having them, but I'd just be careful about them that's all. The existing rule was made because we had HUGE amounts of false info in the wiki, but as most of it has been removed, I'm not too opposed to relaxing the rule, provided we take due care with where we tread. Slax01 08:26, March 2, 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, when I said "information about any particular fan" I was just trying to make a point - I don't see much reason to actually add that kind of thing to the wiki. For the fan-made stuff, I was thinking of just adding notes about "this is NOT official, so don't add pages about it or ask why it's not on the wiki". Anyway, my main point is that "official" spellings can still be plain wrong - just look at the official Zoids Infinity EX+ site - and there should be some better way of deciding what to use. Sorry about arguing so much ;) Cheironyx 10:04, March 2, 2011 (UTC)

Fan stuff in general lacks notability. For example, if I make a custom Zoid, who's to say it's more or less notable than another fan-made Zoid? There are potentially infinite things we would have to add to the wiki, and every one would need the "this is not official" disclaimer. It would be trivial to drum up more fan-made pages than official ones. In particular, this is a problem with internet forums. While some forums are indeed big, they are certainly not ubiquitous. Right now, this wiki isn't intended to supersede internet forums. The fan-made things can be kept to the fourms. We could add something like that in the future, but I'd suggest talking about that on the help desk. As it stands, the rule it just there to prevent people from claiming notability over other people, which can cause flames.
As for your second point, about the official spellings being wrong. The rules are primarily there disambiguate between various official spellings. That site falls under rule 2 "published Japanese media which uses English letters". Whereas rule number 1 states "published English media". So the site you've listed wouldn't be used unless there was no English version of that character's name.
To try and give an example of the rules in action I'll take some names. The site you've provided states "Brat Hunter". The English release of Zoids Legacy states "Ballad H.", the New Century DVD special features states "Brad Hunter (Ballad Hunter)" and finally, the anime calls him "Brad" (but don't state a surname).
So rule number 1 kicks in "published English media" over "published Japanese media which uses English letters". That leaves "Brad", "Brad Hunter (Ballad Hunter)", "Ballad H." all preferred over "Brat Hunter". But now we have to distinguish between the various english versions. The most popular version is by far the anime, which calls him "Brad", but ommits the surname. So further info is needed, leaving the anime DVD and Zoids Legacy. Now the DVD is less popular than the TV airings of the anime, and Legacy is the only Zoids game to recieve a world-wide release. So popularity can't distinguish between the two. Common sense kicks in, saying Legacy's translation is generally pretty poor, and that the anime DVD is the same as the TV show. This gives us the final name of "Brad Hunter".
That's how the rules work, and they work very well. Part of the reason for the rules was to stop the whole fan-made thing above. In some rare cases (e.g. Zoids Genesis) the names of characters have to be taken from fan-translations. But then it causes problems, why is one person's fan-translation better or worse than another person's translation? In particular, when people start doing "corrections" to Japanese names. For example, take a look at Palty. In the past (before we had these rules) there were two contesting names "Palty" and "Party". One fan thought "Party should be used because that's the correction to the spelling of Palty", another fan thought "Palty should be used because it sounds more foreign, and other anime/games do this (e.g Tales of Symphonia)". Both people here had perfectly valid reasons for supporting their claims, and as it stood, it was impossible to say who's translation was right, and who's was wrong. So the only way to resolve this was to make the rules (as they are now) and lay down the law. That's what is meant by: "Unofficial translations are subjective and often contradict one another, and therefore cannot be reliably cited.". It's only there to stop flame wars.
So, I've blabbed on for a while, but hopefully that gives enough reasons as to why the rules are as they are. They might seem like they are choosing a bad or deliberately wrong name, but we do always try and use the most correct official name possible. I am open to changing the rules, but so far the number of problems it's solved has been far greater than the number it's caused. Sylvanelite 07:13, March 3, 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, the rules work fine how they are. I guess the main idea I'm getting at is that we should have another option for when the fan opinion is overwhelmingly against the official spelling for a justified reason - e.g. Elephantus over Elepantus or Störmer over Sheterma. I'm guessing most fans wouldn't be happy with spelling Raven's name as "Leyvin", even if there was no anime and the Infinity page was all we had. But I don't mind too much if the rules stay as they are. P.S. The OAR Elephantus had no name, unless you want to call it "The Zoid That Has 2 Huge Ears And Is Sturdy And Strong" :P Cheironyx 07:26, March 4, 2011 (UTC)

I have said this in the past, and my argument hasn't changed. Here's a brief overview of what it was: Firstly is with respect to "most fans". "Most fans" would have no idea what the Elephantus or Stormer are in the first place, as most fans are spawned from the Nc0 or CC/GF animes (or at least, most english fans, who comprise our audience), and are probably not represented on internet forums (especially given the demographic and years zero/CC were released). This, by default, means people using these names can be assumed to be in a minority. Secondly, if we assume that people read this wiki (admittedly, a tall assumption xD), then any information we have on here *becomes* a popular opinion. Thirdly, "justified" is subjective. If you popularise a name, people will find so-called "justifications" to keep it (examples are plentiful, heck I just did it on the Elephantus talk page). I'm not trying to shoot you down, I appreciate the sentiment, and your point of view makes sense, I'm just playing devil's advocate so that decisions we make here are robust and sound. Slax01 08:13, March 4, 2011 (UTC)


This was written in reply to Cheironyx's edit, not Slax's. I was writing this while Slax posted, so there was a merge conflict.
There are three problems with that.
1) Who measures "overwhelming"? Can you tell me how many Zoids fans there are in the world, and of those, how many use the name "Elephantus"? The answer is no. What you can do is cite forums, but forums are very good at self-promoting wrong information. For example, fans "overwhelmingly" used the name Berserk Führer, which is one reason why the Fury's page initially lived under Führer. Ultimately though, the people that actually knew the name Führer were a small minority of the people who knew the Zoid (almost an insignificant number compared to the people who know the name Fury). It's impossible to measure "overwhelming", so we don't use that as a factor in decision making.
2) It doesn't settle arguments. Like the Palty vs Party thing. If someone comes up with a good reason for an alternative name, there is no way of settling the argument. "Better" is subjective. "Official" is not.
3) "Fan opinion" is self-fulfilling. "Because fans call it Elephantus, it should be Elephantus on the wiki", which in turn means any fans reading the wiki now call it Elephantus, which increases the number of fans calling it "Elephantus". That's circular reasoning, and could be applied to anything.
Making exceptions would defeat the point of having the rules, because the rules are ultimately only there to settle arguments when they arises. We would (actually we do) get thing like "but you made an exception for page XYZ why not ABC as well"? I am open to suggestions, but any changes to the rules have to be able to stop arguments without ambiguity, that's the only real strength to the current rules. Sylvanelite 08:19, March 4, 2011 (UTC)

I guess I can't argue with that. I really don't want Störmer and Shuu changed, but all I can say in their defence is that I've seen maybe two people spell their names that way and zero people (but one pamphlet) spell them another way :P Cheironyx 12:10, March 4, 2011 (UTC)

New rule

Can I propose a new rule/guideline or two? Firstly, most English-language Zoids material uses American spellings (e.g. Styluarmor over Styluarmour, Customize Parts over Customise Parts), so all Zoids terms (if not entire pages) should use American spelling, with exceptions for OER/Zoids2/NER stuff (since they were mainly in the UK and therefore use British spellings) or if there is solid evidence for the British spelling (e.g. サーベル sabre and セイバー saber are spelled differently in English and in katakana - sabre is used for the OJR Sabretiger and in weapon names from most releases, by the way). Secondly, evidence from memory, second-hand info and similar hard-to-verify sources should be strongly discouraged on almost every page. However, it should be strongly encouraged for discontinued and hard-to-get-at material such as Online Wars and the Fuzors mobile phone game, since it could be the only possible way to get information about them. Cheironyx 00:44, March 27, 2011 (UTC)

"all Zoids terms should use American spelling"
"In the event of two official translations existing, if common sense does not resolve the conflict, use the most popular version." -I believe this sentence adequately resolves the issue, especially considering that your rationale for using American is that it is the most popular (how widespread a term is in official media is a good proxy for popularity).
as for general spelling, american english should be used by default, for consistency. Writing in non-american english is not against the rules though, for the same reason "making typos" is not against the rules.
"... However, it should be strongly encouraged for discontinued and hard-to-get-at material such as Online Wars and the Fuzors mobile phone game, since it could be the only possible way to get information about them."
I disagree with this. If you look at the edit history of many of the video games' character pages, you'll notice that many had a great deal of completely false information inserted (example here). As such, I am against encouraging using hard-to-verify sources- it can easily lead to justified vandalism. I'd rather have no info than incorrect info. That said, the opposite is true, if you object with an article and want it deleted, you need to say why, and in saying why, you need citations, so if someone makes a page without citation, then it can't be removed without citation, so if the page is on an obscure object, which has no citations either way, then that means the page can't be removed at all. Of course, common sense hold here, so this is by no means a blank cheque to make pages. Slax01 05:43, March 27, 2011 (UTC)

Changed "most popular" to "most information" as popular can easily change due to fans of the franchise. "Most information" an example would be Bigasauru vs. Giant ZRK, Giant ZRK is more popular because it's the name used in the US and Europe but Bigasauru, while less popular and a #2 catagory name, has way more pertanant information to benefit the article.

I can see why you'd say this but I had thought about it when I wrote these and my reason for using popular is listed at the top of the page: "This Wiki revolves around the use of many different contributors and users. This is the reason why popularity is a useful and reliable criteria for picking the naming convention. "
Information, on the other hand, while it seems like a reliable objective measure, is actually much more subjective than it looks. Popularity can be got from measures like sales, viewership, or proxies thereof. But how do we measure information? Number of pages? Episodes? re-releases? do we take quality of information or just look at quantity? If we do look at quality, how do we define quality? Thus, I went with popularity. I know above I said not to add info about fans of the series, but its not really a contradiction, I could elaborate, but to save creating a wall of text, I won't unless asked.
On the Giant ZRK comment, I do want to change the page to Giant ZRK, in lieu of a citation for an english release under the name "Bigasauru". Slax01 08:24, April 6, 2011 (UTC)
Leon what's your problem dude? Undoing my edits and saying "why would you delete it with no explination?". HELLO: I GAVE my explanations already. I can't help it if you are illiterate! I am undoing your (horrible and messy) edits, if you have any sensible comments feel free to post them, but for god's sake stop undoing my edits for no reason!! Slax01 21:49, April 6, 2011 (UTC)

That is an exageration. I do not undo all of your edits. If it seems that way, then you have my apologies. Also, I did not see it last time, sorry about that. I will leave it the way it is now.--Leon35 00:03, April 7, 2011 (UTC)

By most information I meant pertaining the Zoid released, not quantity of the info per say but the version of the Zoid varient we know the most about. This would be the varient with the most pertinant information that visitors/ average fans most easily recognise/be looking for. It would also be the varient/spelling with info that can most easily be cited. Following the trend, in most cases, this would end up being the more popular varient/spelling anyway. Zaber over Saber, Sheild Liger over Shield Tiger, Bear Fighter over Zear and so on.

Maybe something to the extent of the "most known and generally used" would be a better way of putting it. Popularity-wise I'm betting Command Wolf AC out ranks the normal one 'cause it was piloted by Brad (same with CW Irvine) and it enjoyed a release here in the U.S., and there were 2 HMM AC's but we use the simpler name Command Wolf because it can direct to the most varients even though white/normal one never made it to the NAR. Plus, the anime character ussually just call it Command Wolf anyway. Spinosnapper (NAR and anime varient) is likely more popular than Spinosapper but -Sapper has better details. Similar cases include Diablotiger over the Battle Legends Diablo Tiger Alpha, Ultrasaurus over the American Ultra Saurus and the big bad NJR Blox names (Dimetroptera) over the cheaper, way-more-common-on-ebay NAR Z-Builder names (Dimetra Ptera).

I'm actually for keeping Bigasauru believe it or not, only because Bigasauru has stats, Battle Story info, how it fought, what beat it and other nice details. Giant ZRK, well, we know it showed up in the US and Namer named the large powerful machine Giant ZRK in the comics.

@Leon, I never said you undid all my edits. I said "stop undoing my edits" because they were my edits, they were undone and I want you to stop it. Next time you falsely accuse me of lying (or "exaggerating"), please read what I have written first, as it is seriously irritating having to repeat myself, considering how many times this has happened now.
@anon:I get where you're coming from, but it doesn't really answer my questions, ie:

"This would be the varient with the most pertinant information"

But how do we define "most pertinent information"?

"that visitors/ average fans most easily recognise/be looking for"

the recognise part is better achieved via popularity than information (its not the number of books written, its who's read them that makes them recognised or sought after).

"It would also be the varient/spelling with info that can most easily be cited."

same problem again, "ease of citation" is subjective, which is particularly problematic as the only time we need this rule is when we have two equally valid citations which contradict each other.

"Maybe something to the extent of the "most known and generally used" would be a better way of putting it."

Isn't this what popular is?

"Spinosnapper (NAR and anime varient) is likely more popular than Spinosapper but -Sapper has better details."

It is pronounced "sapper" in the anime and given the overwhelming (and unquestionable) popularity of the New Century anime, I'd have to disagree with this conclusion. I would do similar for the other instances, but I don't have my sources handy, so I'd be working off memory and I'd likely make a mistake.

"I'm actually for keeping Bigasauru believe it or not"

Without a citation, I'm not. Point in case: people love writing Furher rather than Fury and without a clear rule to stop them, will fight tooth and nail to get their version used, no matter how little sense it actually makes. This, and only this, is my reason for the rule, and a refusal to let people go by their preferences. A pity, because I'd love to just let people go with what they want, but this community is just way too unreliable (lol I remember at one point we had two totally different pages: one for Rev Raptor one for Rev Rater- go figure xD). Slax01 08:37, April 7, 2011 (UTC)

@anon1: agree with slax. If there is no citations, why should be keep them? Bigasauru will become a page redirect, but the page itself wll become Bigasaur or Giant Zrk, depending on what the community decidesLeon35 14:18, April 7, 2011 (UTC)

If it's Popular to jump off a cliff...

Did I not clarify that this would usually be the more popular varient anyway?


Pertinant, relevant info how about you find a good way of measuring it for me. It's one of the criteria on making new pages.

Yes, "well known/ generally used" can be concieved as very very similar to popular (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/popular) , that's why I suggested to the extent of. My intentions were for a slightly more rigid justification than the plain more "popular" bit in cases of two or more valid names.

Popularity has a nasty habit of changing as do fan-bases, toy company priorities and the favors of television broadcasters. And saying something "is more popular" can hardly be considered a strong source/citation.

A criteria for finding more rigid justification than "popular" or "common sense" may be found through factoring in which Zoid/varient/name has enjoyed the longer release, includes stats (model's box first, then DVD, then games and cards) that are easy to include under the photo, which was more available to buy, which model came first and which name is simplest to direct to multiple versions of a single Zoid.

Now, most of those are model favorable factors. After considering the best Model name then Anime, Comics and Game names can be considered. My logic being, Models are the backbone of the Zoids franchise. Anime is likely the bulk of the Zoids fan-base, yes but not the franchise. Fan-base make the wiki's visitors and contributors, Franchise makes the facts. And, yeah, there can be alot of overlap in there.

Yes, some of these factors may be considered common sense and may indeed lead to the popular Zoid anyway, but there should be something better than simple popularity when considering a name for an entire page containing lots of releases. In a case of two or more valid printed names it seems more logical to first use the whatever varient has stats and battle story used for the page, second which ever was released more/longer, third which single name can be more broadly used to define multiple releases and then consider whatever anime/comic/game/fanbased stuff last.

BTW, -Snapper is what my /Zero pamphlet calls it. I prefer a printed source of U.S. origin over the Canadian translated /Zero anime. Unless you mean the Japanese /Zero. Yes, the anime is very popular. But, how do you source anime info and pronounciation but through what anime fans analyze and perceive as "correct"? As the community (and ultimately the popularity) is "unreliable", there should be some consideration put into finding a more solid source to base the criteria.

A fan can say "Saix is faster than a Storm Sworder" but the models stats say otherwise. If a wave of Anime Saix fans came in saying the model's stats are wrong and prove Saix is faster because Episode X clearly shows Saix outpacing Strom Sworder at exactly 3 minutes into Episode X and Character A stated Saix can go at the much faster speed of B miles per hour, what then? Should we toss out the printed speed of Saix in favor of the more popular Anime speed? The current speed would probably not be changed even though a faster Saix was popular, valid and cited. Anime (the more popular) Zoid sizes (and other stats), creation date, abilities, factions, combat purpose, original creator and length of service in proper ZAC years are not put as the main/overview facts of the Zoid as a whole. Popularity has not dictated the creation of pages either. Why should naming be popularity-based? Especially whan there's better criteria out there.

Long post is long, especially for just a few special case names. tildetildetildesquiggle


Also, "popular" opinion can be completely wrong - for example, the most common spelling I've seen for RBOZ-001 is not Bigasauru or Giant ZRK, it's "Bigasaur", which is not used in any official media. And even with official sources, I'm not entirely convinced about Legacy having higher priority than English spellings in Japanese sources. Cheironyx 23:07, April 7, 2011 (UTC)

The current rules will stand unless someone proposes an UNAMBIGUOUS alternative. I will now go through and address the points raised: Sylvanelite 08:42, April 8, 2011 (UTC)

Spinosnapper (NAR and anime varient) is likely more popular than Spinosapper but -Sapper has better details. ... Snapper is what my /Zero pamphlet calls it.
- Ignoring use of the word "better" because that's subjective and ambiguous. These are details which have not been previously known or discussed. They aren't a shortcoming in the rule, because nobody has tried to apply the rule to the Spinosapper's page.
Similar cases include Diablotiger over the Battle Legends Diablo Tiger Alpha, Ultrasaurus over the American Ultra Saurus and the big bad NJR Blox names (Dimetroptera) over the cheaper, way-more-common-on-ebay NAR Z-Builder names (Dimetra Ptera).
- Again, most of these aren't shortcomings in the rules, but are pages where the rules have never been used on. More importantly, there was no proposed solution here as to any alternative rules that would be able to settle these conflicts, while the current rulings will be able to sort them out.
Popularity has a nasty habit of changing as do fan-bases, toy company priorities and the favors of television broadcasters. And saying something "is more popular" can hardly be considered a strong source/citation.
- Popularity can be measured based on sales. So it can be cited. New Century is more popular than Fuzors or Genesis, that is an unambiguous citable fact.
A fan can say "Saix is faster than a Storm Sworder" but the models stats say otherwise.
- This has nothing to do with the previous rulings. Model stats and anime stats are always kept separate, there are model sections and anime sections on every page, so this information can be added without any conflicts at all. The rules never need to be applied in this situation.
Popularity has not dictated the creation of pages either. Why should naming be popularity-based? Especially whan there's better criteria out there.
- Popularity is not the number 1 rule. It only serves when there is a conflict. Page creation is never ambiguous, because the page doesn't exist, so there isn't a conflict, so the rule is never applied. Page moving may sometimes be based on popularity, but not until reasonable amount of citations are given for all sides of the request to move.


In a case of two or more valid printed names it seems more logical to first use the whatever varient has stats and battle story used for the page, second which ever was released more/longer, third which single name can be more broadly used to define multiple releases and then consider whatever anime/comic/game/fanbased stuff last.
- This is an ambiguous alternative. Which battle story? The Japanese one? So now we are stuck using Japanese names as the first point of reference? What happens when the Japanese name is released in both English letters and Japanese characters which should be used? As for the earliest release, why? The earliest release is always the Japanese version, which means the "second" criteria never helps over the ambiguity of the first. The third criteria throws the fanbase in the anime, so now fans are able to use any spelling the like and have it treated equally to the anime? By those rules I could call it "puppy fury" and have it weighted the same as the anime "berserk fury".
And even with official sources, I'm not entirely convinced about Legacy having higher priority than English spellings in Japanese sources.
- Then propose an alternative. Specifically, in the case of Legacy vs Japanese is the Party/Palty argument I mentioned above. Legacy resolves the argument, which is enough reason to use it over Japanese. I've not seen any examples of this working the other way around.


My reply (Slax's) starts here. I'll try keep it concise.

Did I not clarify that this would usually be the more popular varient anyway?

Yes, but as this rule is only ever to be invoked in unusual circumstances, I chose to ignore it.

Pertinant, relevant info how about you find a good way of measuring it for me. It's one of the criteria on making new pages.

This has not answered how the quantity of pertinent information is to be measured.

Yes, "well known/ generally used" can be concieved as very very similar to popular (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/popular) , that's why I suggested to the extent of. My intentions were for a slightly more rigid justification than the plain more "popular" bit in cases of two or more valid names.

Please see my above and below points on how your definition is less rigid.

Popularity has a nasty habit of changing as do fan-bases

Being inflexible and rigid isn't a good thing. Its not like popularity changes rapidly either.

And saying something "is more popular" can hardly be considered a strong source/citation.

is more popular" is backed by a citation, it isn't one in of itself. I am surprised I needed to explain that.

A criteria for finding more rigid justification than "popular" or "common sense" may be found through factoring in which Zoid/varient/name has enjoyed the longer release, includes stats (model's box first, then DVD, then games and cards) that are easy to include under the photo, which was more available to buy, which model came first and which name is simplest to direct to multiple versions of a single Zoid.

The subjective sections in the above include: "easy to include", "which was more available to buy" and "which name is simplest", thus reducing the rigidity of the current rule.

My logic being, Models are the backbone of the Zoids franchise.

Yes, but they are a weak and frail backbone that would collapse under their own weight if not held together by the muscle mass of the anime series.

Franchise makes the facts.

If the franchise DID make the "facts", we wouldn't be in a situation where almost every model kit contradicts almost every other model kit, and we wouldn't need the rule.

it seems more logical to first use the whatever varient has stats and battle story used for the page"

Battle story doesn't have a page. Nuff said really

second which ever was released more/longer

"more" is subjective. Longer I have no issue with, provided it can actually be cited (many releases don't have any reliable dates, and then you've got cross-region releases...)

which single name can be more broadly used.

This is completely subjective and utterly inappropriate for a rule. In fact this is exactly what the rule was designed to stop.

BTW, -Snapper is what my /Zero pamphlet calls it. I prefer a printed source of U.S. origin over the Canadian translated /Zero anime.

This kind of thing is EXACTLY what the rules are here to prevent.

A fan can say "Saix is faster than a Storm Sworder" but the models stats say otherwise.

..So, you haven't read the Saix's talk page I gather?
  • next user*

Also, "popular" opinion can be completely wrong - for example, the most common spelling I've seen for RBOZ-001 is not Bigasauru or Giant ZRK, it's "Bigasaur", which is not used in any official media.

I suggest you don't get caught up in trying to win the battle and loose sight of the war- the rule clearly states a citation MUST be provided before ANY consideration is given to popularity, so this is a non-issue.

And even with official sources, I'm not entirely convinced about Legacy having higher priority than English spellings in Japanese sources.

I am more than happy to discuss this. I believe Legacy is adequate as a citation because it is consistent (it has to be, it is the only release), whereas Romanisations aren't, and I have no reason to assume common sense can't resolve any issues arising with Legacy. That said, if you have an amendment to the rules, please post it so I can have a look, pre-emptively shooting in the dark is kinda not helpful. If it works I'll put it up.

Hope that helps Slax01 14:06, April 8, 2011 (UTC)

DUDE just look at what one of your own Admins, Leon is trying to do! He's going with the popular Bigasaur over the already cited Bigasauru and ZRK! Is that not a hint?? tildetildetildesquiggle



And these popular citations are not ambiguous? Take the lovely example of Zaber Fang, Zaber Fang was indeed the American spelling and the popular anime spelling. But is there a source stating that the viewers of the anime (which has NOT aired in years) who recognise the name FANG out number the buyers and fans of ALL the TIGER (model, comic, card and game) releases? Please, I'd like to see these sources.

Heck, why should I even cite a source for Zoids with varients? I could just use the varient name to fit whatever I want.

The title directly relates to the page's content.

That's why I have issue with the Popular name, the TITLE of the page "Zaber Fang" is fine but wrongly putting Zaber in the content where Saber should be is just sloppy. Where on earth is the citation that Fang served under the Zenebas Empire, that fact is flat wrong! Blinding yellow Zaber Fangs NEVER made it to the battle story to start with. Now, Zaber Fang is the name of a specific varient, when switching the term intermittantly you distort which varient is which. Did Rudolph pilot a Gold Zaber Fang, no. Can you cite that the yellow Zaber Fang has an Infa-red laser searcher or Small-Bore Anti-Zoid Laser Machinegun? I'm looking at my Zaber's box right now, those are wrong. The "popular" (which likely an innacurately "popular") Zaber Fang is not an accurate "umbrella" term for the content (NOT TITLE) because it is a specific Yellow varient already.

But, if I were to CORRECT and CITE which content belongs to Saber and which content belongs to Zaber, Zaber would be used ALOT less. I think it would be strange to have a correct page about Sabers titled Zaber so I will let the FALSE information of the yellow Zaber remain where it is.

Having the correct varient for the respective content is important, true?

Now, these just factors about the title's influence on content that I put up to consider. I have nothing against the current rules of regular Title naming. I am only pointing out the influence the "popular" Title name has on the Zoid's content and varients and how the popular title can lead to sloppy misinformation.

@ Slax "This kind of thing is EXACTLY what the rules are here to prevent." Preventing the misuse of Canadian translations or American print? Kinda ironic that the Ocean group's (vancouver) dub is taken as a rule #1 source.


Which battle story? The Japanese one?

...how many other Battle Stories do you know of?

What happens when the Japanese name is released in both English letters and Japanese characters which should be used?

We always use the English lettering, because we have English keyboards. If there isn't an English spelling (e.g. Iceblazer), we translate the Japanese spelling. However, the original Japanese spelling should still appear somewhere on the page for reference.

Yes, but they are a weak and frail backbone that would collapse under their own weight if not held together by the muscle mass of the anime series.

The OJR had no anime and it was the longest-running Zoids series ever. Compare that to the anime-based series such as Fuzors and Genesis that collapsed in under a year :P

If the franchise DID make the "facts", we wouldn't be in a situation where almost every model kit contradicts almost every other model kit, and we wouldn't need the rule.

The model kits and their boxes are largely consistent, it's the various stories built around them (especially the anime and games) that cause contradictions.

Battle story doesn't have a page. Nuff said really

It really needs to. The Battle Story includes a dozen books, two videos, multiple webcomics, over 40 pamphlets, several video games and about three HUNDRED model kit boxes. The entire Fuzors world got about 9 hours of footage and about 30 model kit boxes, plus a couple of video games.

I believe Legacy is adequate as a citation because it is consistent (it has to be, it is the only release), whereas Romanisations aren't

An actual romanisation would be completely consistent. You're talking about the translations in Japanese sources, which are 99% consistent for primary sources (i.e. boxes, anime, manga, games) anyway. And Legacy isn't even consistent WITHIN ITSELF: It spells Steve's last name as Tros, Toros and Totos.

The current rules will stand unless someone proposes an UNAMBIGUOUS alternative.

My personal preference (which will probably get shot down, but I'll put it here anyway) is to use info from NJR/Fuzors/Genesis boxes first, then OJR, then NAR, then OER. That method follows the precedent of about 80% of official sources, such as Saga DS. It also keeps the idea proposed above, because NJR/Fuzors/Genesis has the greatest volume of official information (and that's citable, by the way), followed by the OJR, followed by NAR and so on. Boxes take priority over anime and manga, which take priority over video games. Official spellings in English (which CAN be from a Japanese source) take priority over "unofficial" translated spellings, which take priority over romanisations (because romanisations are just romaji, not translations).

Take the lovely example of Zaber Fang

Exactly what I was about to use. Sabre (Z2) and Saber (TZ) have just one model each. Zabre (OER) has a model and some minor comic appearances. Zaber Fang (NAR) has two models plus an action figure, multiple anime appearances and two video game appearances. Sabretiger (OJR) has one model, multiple Battle Story appearances and at least six video game appearances. But Saber Tiger (NJR) has at least four models, various mini-figures, heaps of Battle Story appearances, and shows up in EVERY anime series, most manga series, every card game and more than twenty video games. THERE is your citation for "more information relevant to X name". Cheironyx 01:38, April 9, 2011 (UTC)

Wow, this is generating a lot of talk. I'll reply to more points raised. Sorry for the long post: Sylvanelite 04:06, April 9, 2011 (UTC)

DUDE just look at what one of your own Admins, Leon is trying to do! He's going with the popular Bigasaur over the already cited Bigasauru and ZRK! Is that not a hint?? tildetildetildesquiggle
- Am I misreading, or didn't Leon agree with Slax? Also just because a member isn't an admin does nothing to alter their point. You wouldn't like it if I wrote "I'm an Admin. You'r wrong." We don't do that. We listen to the points people raise, be it you, slax, another admin or anyone. Well, at least we try to. Being an admin doesn't make you have an infinite well of knowledge from nowhere.
And these popular citations are not ambiguous?
- Your confusing terms here. Popular citations aren't ambiguous otherwise they wouldn't be a citation.
Take the lovely example of Zaber Fang, Zaber Fang was indeed the American spelling and the popular anime spelling. But is there a source stating that the viewers of the anime (which has NOT aired in years) who recognise the name FANG out number the buyers and fans of ALL the TIGER (model, comic, card and game) releases? Please, I'd like to see these sources.
- Likewise, you can't provide anything saying that the people would recognise Saber Tiger over Zaber Fang. However, the example doesn't end there. The reason the anime is used (when it comes to popularity) is because "Brad" is used in the anime "Ballad" is used in a lot of the other places, Japanese media, english games and even anime DVDs. Your logic for changing to Tiger over Fang would mean that the Brad page would need to be moved to Ballad.
Heck, why should I even cite a source for Zoids with varients? I could just use the varient name to fit whatever I want.
- As a matter of fact, this happens a lot. This wiki does not hide other names for Zoids, the rules just stipulate which page the Zoid should be listed under.
That's why I have issue with the Popular name, the TITLE of the page "Zaber Fang" is fine but wrongly putting Zaber in the content where Saber should be is just sloppy
- Hold up. The anime sections call it Zaber Fang, but the model sections call it: Sabre Tiger, Zabre, Great Sabre, Saber Tiger, etc. We do not wrongly put zoids names into their context. If we do, then it's a mistake and SHOULD BE EDITED.
Where on earth is the citation that Fang served under the Zenebas Empire, that fact is flat wrong!
- If it's wrong, edit it. The wiki is NOT 100% correct. There are many mistakes on the wiki. However, if it's a matter of naming, please read on.
Blinding yellow Zaber Fangs NEVER made it to the battle story to start with.
- Battle story is very difficult for editors to correct. If they state something that is wrong, go add it. The main point of contention with battle story is that most of it (if not all of it) is FAN TRANSLATED. Meaning semantic differences are "lost in translation". If the Zaber Fang page stated "yellow Zaber Fangs" were in battle story, remove the word yellow. However, the names used should be the ones that are used elsewhere. This is because anime names appear in both Battle story and anime (prozen, etc), and it makes no sense to swap to the official anime name and a fan translated name for the characters, so it makes no sense to do it for the Zoids. Unless you have an official English translation for all of battle story, it runs enough parallels with the anime for it to merit using the anime names.
Now, Zaber Fang is the name of a specific varient, when switching the term intermittantly you distort which varient is which.
- And as I mentioned before, the page is fairly consistent with the context of terms used.
Zaber Fang is not an accurate "umbrella" term for the content (NOT TITLE) because it is a specific Yellow varient already.
- And this is exactly what we avoid. The only umbrealla-ing that happens is with battle story, because there is no official translation aside from the anime adoptions. Otherwise, the title of the page is pretty much the only thing that is changed.
But, if I were to CORRECT and CITE which content belongs to Saber and which content belongs to Zaber, Zaber would be used ALOT less.
- This is done already. We try to cite things correctly. But the wiki is huge, and citations are hard to come by.
I think it would be strange to have a correct page about Sabers titled Zaber so I will let the FALSE information of the yellow Zaber remain where it is.
- If you're still talking about battle story, the information on the wiki says nothing about the Zoid being yellow, the name is used because Battle Story shares names with the anime. As such, the Anime names are used because there is no official translation of Battle story. If you have an official translation, PLEASE provide it. Some people (myself included) would be dying to read it all first hand.
...how many other Battle Stories do you know of?
- Exactly, then it's useless as a rule because all of battle story is fan-translated, which as I've said many times leads to arguments about which fan is right.
We always use the English lettering, because we have English keyboards. If there isn't an English spelling (e.g. Iceblazer), we translate the Japanese spelling. However, the original Japanese spelling should still appear somewhere on the page for reference.
- This is pretty much the rules as they are right now.
The OJR had no anime and it was the longest-running Zoids series ever. Compare that to the anime-based series such as Fuzors and Genesis that collapsed in under a year :P
- This works both ways. It's easy to say that Zoids only took off outside of Japan after the release of the first anime (CC/GF and NC0), model kit sales support this. Additionally, the NJR shared many of its Zoids with those that appeared in the anime, so in fact, it would be easy to attribute the success of the OJR to the anime themselves (because our page on the OJR includes many Zoids seen in the anime, so I don't see why you say it "had no anime"). You cite how Fuzors and Genesis anime collapsed, but their model-based sales also collapsed.
The model kits and their boxes are largely consistent, it's the various stories built around them (especially the anime and games) that cause contradictions.
- As with the Zaber Fang mentioned before, there were many different names given to the different models. They are not largely consistent, especially across releases. The ones that are consistent, are usually Zoids that aren't re-released (e.g. Diloforce is very consistent, but that's because there is very little information).
It really needs to. The Battle Story includes a dozen books, two videos, multiple webcomics, over 40 pamphlets, several video games and about three HUNDRED model kit boxes. The entire Fuzors world got about 9 hours of footage and about 30 model kit boxes, plus a couple of video games.
- Just like with Genesis, if it doesn't exist, it won't write itself. If someone has access to all this information, please share it by adding to the wiki.
An actual romanisation would be completely consistent.
- In theory, yes. In practice no. Aside from the obvious (l/r) even Japanese media does not Romanise their own letters accordingly. A very typical example is Mazinger The "ger" come from the Katakana "ガー" which is Romanised to "gaa". Yet in virtually every appearance of ガー it is not translated to "gaa", usually "ger or gar" is used. (as an example of gar: GaoGaiGar). There is no consistency even in direct Romanisation.
And Legacy isn't even consistent WITHIN ITSELF: It spells Steve's last name as Tros, Toros and Totos.
- Fans are far less consistent than Legacy. For example (yet again) Party vs Palty. Using Legacy resolved this argument. Using a Romanisation caused the argument.
My personal preference (which will probably get shot down, but I'll put it here anyway) is to use info from NJR/Fuzors/Genesis boxes first, then OJR, then NAR, then OER. That method follows the precedent of about 80% of official sources, such as Saga DS. It also keeps the idea proposed above, because NJR/Fuzors/Genesis has the greatest volume of official information (and that's citable, by the way), followed by the OJR, followed by NAR and so on. Boxes take priority over anime and manga, which take priority over video games. Official spellings in English (which CAN be from a Japanese source) take priority over "unofficial" translated spellings, which take priority over romanisations (because romanisations are just romaji, not translations).
- As I replied to above, Romanji is ambiguous. Romanji caused the Palty/Party debate. Romanji is the reason the rules were implemented. I am happy to listen to the suggestions raised, but Japanese characters (Katakana, Hiragana, or Kanji) can only be used as the lowest-level rule. Yes I am shooting that change down, because I was the one who had to resolve that argument. I do not want it happening again. The rest of what you've coincides with the current rules.
Exactly what I was about to use. Sabre (Z2) and Saber (TZ) have just one model each. Zabre (OER) has a model and some minor comic appearances. Zaber Fang (NAR) has two models plus an action figure, multiple anime appearances and two video game appearances. Sabretiger (OJR) has one model, multiple Battle Story appearances and at least six video game appearances. But Saber Tiger (NJR) has at least four models, various mini-figures, heaps of Battle Story appearances, and shows up in EVERY anime series, most manga series, every card game and more than twenty video games. THERE is your citation for "more information relevant to X name".
- There is one key problem with that ruling: To support that change would mean to also change Brad's page to Ballad (since brad is almost exclusively called Brad in the spoken anime only), which is the wrong decision. "Brad" appeared in one anime, "Ballad" appeared in the anime (japanese) as well as games. As far as boxes go, that would mean changing his name to "Barad" because that's what appears on his HMM box.


Am I misreading, or didn't Leon agree with Slax?

He means on the Bigasauru talk page, where Leon said to call the page "Bigasaur" despite that being an unofficial name.

Your logic for changing to Tiger over Fang would mean that the Brad page would need to be moved to Ballad.

So? The current rules would mean that Störmer should be moved to Sheterma.

...which is the wrong decision.

Why exactly is it wrong? And don't just use the rules to justify your example to justify the rules :P

The main point of contention with battle story is that most of it (if not all of it) is FAN TRANSLATED. Meaning semantic differences are "lost in translation". If the Zaber Fang page stated "yellow Zaber Fangs" were in battle story, remove the word yellow. However, the names used should be the ones that are used elsewhere. This is because anime names appear in both Battle story and anime (prozen, etc), and it makes no sense to swap to the official anime name and a fan translated name for the characters, so it makes no sense to do it for the Zoids. Unless you have an official English translation for all of battle story, it runs enough parallels with the anime for it to merit using the anime names.

...Well, to begin with, the Battle Story has a lot less parallels with the anime than people think. Only Chaotic Century is remotely similar to the Battle Story, and that's only in setting and a couple of characters, not the general events or backstory. The dubbed anime is also inconsistent with the American models (Gordos vs Gordosaur) and with itself (Gordos is often confused with Godos). As for "using the anime names", I agree - use the ORIGINAL (i.e. Japanese) anime names, which are "the ones that are used elsewhere" in the NJR models, video games, manga, Battle Story and so on. And fan translation may be subjective, but "taigaa" should NEVER translate to "fang". Also, according to Wiktionary... semantic (adj) 3. Petty or trivial; quibbling, niggling. Bwahaha.

If the Zaber Fang page stated "yellow Zaber Fangs" were in battle story, remove the word yellow.

The problem is that "Zaber Fangs" are by definition yellow, except in the (inconsistently) dubbed Chaotic Century and the (unreliable) Legacy and Battle Legends. The ones used by the Zenebas Empire were Sabretigers (OJR), which have a stats difference from Saber Tigers (NJR) and a colour difference from Zaber Fangs (NAR).

This works both ways. It's easy to say that Zoids only took off outside of Japan after the release of the first anime (CC/GF and NC0), model kit sales support this. Additionally, the NJR shared many of its Zoids with those that appeared in the anime, so in fact, it would be easy to attribute the success of the OJR to the anime themselves (because our page on the OJR includes many Zoids seen in the anime, so I don't see why you say it "had no anime"). You cite how Fuzors and Genesis anime collapsed, but their model-based sales also collapsed.

Firstly, the OER did fine without an anime, and the comic series began after the line took off. Secondly, the OJR finished NINE YEARS before Chaotic Century. Chaotic Century had no effect on that line's popularity, unless you think Tomy released a hundred different models and they didn't actually sell until nine years later. :P Thirdly, I meant that the Fuzors and Genesis model lines, the only model lines directly based on an anime series, both collapsed. Which was exactly my point. So much for that paragraph.

There were many different names given to the different models. They are not largely consistent, especially across releases.

Yes, American models often have different names to Japanese models, but why does that support the American names? Notice that the Japanese (NJR) model names stay the same throughout the 4 Japanese anime series, the 30-odd Japanese video games, the 7 Japanese manga series, the piles of Japanese Battle Story material and the various Japanese spin-off products. The American names can't even stay consistent between the models and the 3 video games.

If someone has access to all this information, please share it by adding to the wiki.

I'm working on it ;) But there's a TON of stuff to add, I can't do it all myself.

Aside from the obvious (l/r) even Japanese media does not Romanise their own letters accordingly. A very typical example is Mazinger The "ger" come from the Katakana "ガー" which is Romanised to "gaa". Yet in virtually every appearance of ガー it is not translated to "gaa", usually "ger or gar" is used. (as an example of gar: GaoGaiGar). There is no consistency even in direct Romanisation.

That is NOT romanisation. That is TRANSLATION. That was my whole point in arguing against romanisation. For example, the romanisation of サーベル is "saaberu" or possibly "sa-beru". Nothing else. The TRANSLATION is "sabre" or "saber" (in this case, Zoids media consistently uses "sabre" - "saber" is spelled セイバー). And notice that I gave romaji (not romanji) lowest priority - Party is better than Parutii :P

The rest of what you've coincides with the current rules.

No it doesn't. NJR over NAR is almost the opposite of the current rules. Cheironyx 09:32, April 9, 2011 (UTC)

@ anon:

  1. - Leon makes mistakes all the time. This has nothing to do with the rules.
  2. - Your claim that Zaber Fangs are yellow is untrue. Non-model =/= non-canon.
  3. - you have STILL not provided any way of quantifying information, regardless of what you think about popularity.
  4. - the rules clearly state that specific versions of Zoids are to be referred to by their specific name. If you have an issue with the "overview" sections, by all means, raise that in the forum (I believe they should be removed, for precicely the reasons you have listed), but it is irrelevant to the rules page.
  5. - your canadian comment misses the mark. The thing the rules are preventing is multiple people saying "I don't like X translation, here, let's use mine instead".

@Cheironyx:

  1. - A battle story page would be much appreciated.
  2. - your rule fails to give any leeway for future releases. Please revise to have a clause for them and I'll see how it looks.
  3. - your Zaber Fang example once again walks right around the question- you have provided an EXAMPLE, not a DEFINITION of how information can be measured. For instance: which Decalto Dragon spelling has the most info? -when creating a rule, you must seek to apply it to the worst examples, not the best.
  4. - an extension of 3, your "greatest volume of official information (and that's citable, by the way)" intrinsically assumes that volume of information is a good criteria for measuring information- and that, implicitly, quality has no bearing. In which case, manga should almost always trump battle story, as mangas are longer. See why I'm asking the question?

@Cheironyx's reply to sylvan:

  1. am not speaking on Sylvan's behalf, I am simply inserting some comments, take them as you will:
  2. - this is the English wiki. We do not cater for Japanese fans, they have their own wiki. Simliarly, we have no information about the names used in the Italian Dub. Not because it is non-canon, but because it is irrelevant.
  3. - Inconsistency means one of the uses is wrong, is says nothing about which one. As you are making the positive claim (the dub's use of "Zaber Fang" is incorrect), burden of proof lies with you. (further, I was not aware of any instance of the three guard's Zoids being called anything but a Zaber, two of which are silver)

In advance, I know most of the replies I would usually get are simply attempts to prove my examples wrong. Of course, any attempt to do so would utterly miss the point, so here's hoping no-one is short-sighted enough to set about wasting their breath on doing that. Slax01 11:18, April 9, 2011 (UTC)


your rule fails to give any leeway for future releases. Please revise to have a clause for them and I'll see how it looks.

I guess it depends on the size of the release and amount of supporting material. If there was another NJR-sized release with a similar volume of supporting material, we could update the names of re-released kits (e.g. Stealth Viper over Snakes), but if it was only NER-sized, we would leave names as-is (e.g. Orudios over Evil Pegasus). It's hard to quantify exactly, but I'd say anything above "almost NJR-sized" (including supporting material) gets priority.

you have provided an EXAMPLE, not a DEFINITION of how information can be measured. ...implicitly, quality has no bearing.

Finding a definition for this is even harder, and I'm not really trying right now. Quality is important too - in fact, quality is half the reason for my "order of naming priority" above (the other half being volume of the release and supporting material). In my opinion, NJR/Fuzors/Genesis sources have the highest level of consistency within each world/storyline, followed by OJR, then NAR. The OER is good for consistency, but too small and obscure for naming purposes in most cases (I'm guessing more people use "Garius" than "Tyrannazoid").

this is the English wiki. We do not cater for Japanese fans, they have their own wiki. Simliarly, we have no information about the names used in the Italian Dub. Not because it is non-canon, but because it is irrelevant.

Yes, it's the English wiki, but most Zoids material is Japanese, and the Japanese material is a more reliable source in most cases than the English material. By the way, I think we should mention any major differences in the Italian dub, because Zoids material is relevant to a Zoids wiki no matter what language it's in.

The general point I'm trying to make is that the majority of information on Zoid pages refers to their Japanese versions, and should therefore use their Japanese names, just like the material the information comes from. And there's still problems with using "popularity" as a source - sales/viewing figures only account for how many people know of a certain name. How popular that name is is a different matter. For example, I know of the "Zaber Fang" and "Saber Tiger" variants, and I choose to use Saber Tiger as the umbrella name, but the only citation for that is if I tell you. The name more people prefer is a subjective and hard-to-cite source, while the name more people know is hard to determine - for example, it includes those who saw the model or read the manga without actually buying them, and the Internet means that people can access heaps of Zoids material without leaving data behind. And thanks to Wikipedia and the Zoids wiki, "the name more people know" is influenced by the very websites trying to use it as justification, so we end up with a feedback loop. In my opinion, neither definition of "popular" should be used as a source. Cheironyx 12:21, April 9, 2011 (UTC)



Even though I'm making another long-winded reply. Please take time to read Slax and Cherionyx's replies. I don't want useful discussion lost because I'm burying it. Sylvanelite 13:05, April 9, 2011 (UTC)


So? The current rules would mean that Störmer should be moved to Sheterma.
- This is what gripes me. The rules have never once been applied to the stormer page, so how can you make that judgement? The only time "Sheterma" has ever been mentioned on this wiki is by you on this talk page. Also, your own rules don't say why "Stormer" would be used over Sheterma. if Sheterma is a valid romanisation and Stormer has never been written outside of Japanese characters, then your rules say go with Sheterma. If Stormer has been written outside of characters, then there should be no reason under the current ruling to change it.
Why exactly is it wrong? And don't just use the rules to justify your example to justify the rules :P
- Simple. Nobody has EVER proposed that Brad's article be moved to Ballad. Even vandals. In the other articles mentioned here and there, there has always been some contesting for the "right" name. In Brad's case, nobody has ever, in the history of the wiki, opted to use Ballad over Brad. In fact, the rules were used on Brad's page. Specifically to sort out his last name. But during this (and other) scrutiny, not one member has ever proposed Ballad as being the forefront name. This is opposed to other pages (like the Sormer one) where the page has never been scrutinised. Brad's page has been looked at, and nobody has considered Ballad as the "correct" name.
...Well, to begin with, the Battle Story has a lot less parallels with the anime than people think. Only Chaotic Century is remotely similar to the Battle Story, and that's only in setting and a couple of characters, not the general events or backstory.
- I never said anything about the amount of parallels in battle story. Just that they were there. Consistency is a big deal for wikis. We had major problems (especially with the earlier genesis pages, but even applied to CC, e.g. Reese and Karl) where names for characters changed on a whim from one page to the next. It meant red links because unmanageable and redirect chains pointed to redundant pages. No joke, at one point Van's article was repeated 5 times on the wiki. Choosing consistent names makes it manageable.
And fan translation may be subjective, but "taigaa" should NEVER translate to "fang".
- And "thermal" should never be translated to "sonic". But I've seen that happen in fan translations. Just because it "shouldn't" be done, doesn't mean it can't be done. In fact, as far as fan translations go, there was a long time ago, several fans who while translating the boxes for models, added in stats that never appeared on the original text. It took years to correct this, because there was uncertainty on if the stats had been made up, or if there had been other obscure media they had used (translated by themselves). Fans are NOT reliable. Heck, as far as fans go, there are still some made-up stats from MMM lingering on this wiki, even without translations getting involved, we still can't track down these pages. It's no different from vandalism in some cases.
The problem is that "Zaber Fangs" are by definition yellow
- No they aren't. The wiki does not make this definition, nor does it assume it. If you want to make that definition, then your not going with what the article actually states.
The ones used by the Zenebas Empire were Sabretigers (OJR), which have a stats difference from Saber Tigers (NJR) and a colour difference from Zaber Fangs (NAR).
- According to your own logic, the "Zenebas" translation shouldn't be used, because that only exists in the anime. It should be ゼネバス (Zenebasu). While Anime sections should (maybe consider) calling it Zenebas.
Firstly, the OER did fine without an anime, and the comic series began after the line took off. Secondly, the OJR finished NINE YEARS before Chaotic Century. Chaotic Century had no effect on that line's popularity, unless you think Tomy released a hundred different models and they didn't actually sell until nine years later. :P Thirdly, I meant that the Fuzors and Genesis model lines, the only model lines directly based on an anime series, both collapsed. Which was exactly my point. So much for that paragraph.
- So, you'll deny that the anime is popular? Even though the list of "most popular" pages on this wiki are all anime-centric? (and that's after re-naming the Berserk Fury, which caused it to drop off the list)
Yes, American models often have different names to Japanese models, but why does that support the American names? Notice that the Japanese (NJR) model names stay the same throughout the 4 Japanese anime series, the 30-odd Japanese video games, the 7 Japanese manga series, the piles of Japanese Battle Story material and the various Japanese spin-off products. The American names can't even stay consistent between the models and the 3 video games.
- The answer this is very simple. This wiki uses English. So at some point a translation needs to be done. I've said it countless times, and I'll say it countless more. If fans do the translations themselves, there will be arguments. If we use official translations then that is unambiguous.
I'm working on it ;) But there's a TON of stuff to add, I can't do it all myself.
- I saw that, and keep up the good work. Recently it seems more content has been added to talk pages than the actual wiki. (which I guess is a good thing, because it means the wiki pages are hopefully beginning to be credible)
That is NOT romanisation. That is TRANSLATION. That was my whole point in arguing against romanisation. For example, the romanisation of サーベル is "saaberu" or possibly "sa-beru". Nothing else. The TRANSLATION is "sabre" or "saber" (in this case, Zoids media consistently uses "sabre" - "saber" is spelled セイバー). And notice that I gave romaji (not romanji) lowest priority - Party is better than Parutii :P
- Ok, let me quote from the wiki page you linked to: Names can be subject to even more variation, with spellings depending on the individual's preference. For example, the manga artist Yasuhiro Nightow's family name would be more conventionally written in Hepburn romanization as Naitō.
- There are whole sections labelled "Differences among romanizations" and "Kana without standardised forms of romanization".
- If you want to keep spouting that it's 100% unambiguous, go ahead, but even the page you linked to states problems with that approach.
- Finally, your definitions for "romanisation" and "translation" are wrong. If you want my personal opinion on this I will give it to you, but I can say I worked in a linguistics company for a full year, and I was specifically designing software to deal with lexical analysis of languages. A romanisation is ANY version of a word whereby it is written in english characters. That is the ONLY criteria for a romanisation. In the case of Mazinger, that is a valid romanisation, as is Majingā. Both are romanisations, the only difference is the method used to derive the romanisation. A translation captures the meaning of the word, which in this case IS a romanisation, because Mazinger has no meaning in english. If you want to capture the way the word is pronounced correctly, you'll end up writing SAMPA or IPA. That is unambiguous. Other methods of romanisations are ambiguous because they loose sounds that roman scripts can't capture correctly.
No it doesn't. NJR over NAR is almost the opposite of the current rules.
- How many times do I have to say it. The NJR can't reliably be used, if it could, these rules would not exist. Because the NJR can't be reliably used, that part of your proposed changes will not be made. This is based on actual events that actually happened on this wiki. I'm not making this stuff up.


BLARGH PEOPLE KEEP WRITING FASTER THAN I CAN REPLY =(

The general point I'm trying to make is that the majority of information on Zoid pages refers to their Japanese versions, and should therefore use their Japanese names, just like the material the information comes from
- The general point I'm trying to make is that we cannot go writing this wiki in Japanese. Translations need to be made, and the only way to do it without fans getting into arguments is by using official translations.
And there's still problems with using "popularity" as a source - sales/viewing figures only account for how many people know of a certain name.
- And this is the only version of "popular" the rules consider. If it can't be cited, we don't use it.
How popular that name is is a different matter. For example, I know of the "Zaber Fang" and "Saber Tiger" variants, and I choose to use Saber Tiger as the umbrella name, but the only citation for that is if I tell you.
- And this is why our rules don't use this as a measure.
The name more people prefer is a subjective and hard-to-cite source, while the name more people know is hard to determine - for example, it includes those who saw the model or read the manga without actually buying them, and the Internet means that people can access heaps of Zoids material without leaving data behind.
- The rules say nothing about personal preference. Nor does it make assumptions about what people know. The "popularity" referenced to in the rules is simple stuff. Legacy sold less copies than there were viewers of New Century.
And thanks to Wikipedia and the Zoids wiki, "the name more people know" is influenced by the very websites trying to use it as justification, so we end up with a feedback loop. In my opinion, neither definition of "popular" should be used as a source.
- WTF. I posted this EXACT THING before in reply to you:
3) "Fan opinion" is self-fulfilling. "Because fans call it Elephantus, it should be Elephantus on the wiki", which in turn means any fans reading the wiki now call it Elephantus, which increases the number of fans calling it "Elephantus". That's circular reasoning, and could be applied to anything.


- The wiki does NOT use fan-based opinion as a judge.

Okay, seen alot has happened since last night. So far, it looks like Cheironyx has alot more credible citations listed than these mystical sales stats.

As for me:

- Leon makes mistakes all the time. This has nothing to do with the rules.

Considering Admins should be an example for the average contributor (and can reflect what average contributors do) I think this is a valid example of what weaknesses the current rules have.

- Your claim that Zaber Fangs are yellow is untrue. Non-model =/= non-canon.

Uhhh... not sure what =/= means. And, unless I've got a freakish case of sudden color blindness, my Zaber Fang model is blinding yellow, as is the one on the English Battle legends and the one on /Zero. How about your models?

- you have STILL not provided any way of quantifying information, regardless of what you think about popularity.

Skipping over the point that I said (several times) these were just factors to consider... it's not just quantity, it's the available facts in order of use on the Zoids page. Stats, story, pilots, use, molds, dates and so-on. If a page is entirely anime based (ex. characters) then it seems silly to go with the more obscure name. If there's a lot of specific varient/model-related info (Bigasauru) then why go with secondary appearances (ZRK)?

Just take a look at the average Zoid page around here, most have a stats sheet. NAR boxes only have weight, depth, hieght and max speed (or at least the 23 NAR boxes I own, if you have some please take a look) but no weapons, battle story or equipment, and in many cases no actual faction name, just the faction logo. Battle Legends (which isn't a very good source due to the player's ability to upgrade Zoids) has one or two standard weapon names, sure, but most of the other info missing. Without Japanese models and games and battle story this would be an inconsistant anime wiki.

- the rules clearly state that specific versions of Zoids are to be referred to by their specific name. If you have an issue with the "overview" sections, by all means, raise that in the forum (I believe they should be removed, for precicely the reasons you have listed), but it is irrelevant to the rules page.

Yeah man, I read that about specific varients, glad you noticed my whole campaign about how Title can lead getting varients mixed up.

- your canadian comment misses the mark. The thing the rules are preventing is multiple people saying "I don't like X translation, here, let's use mine instead".


And you missed my point about Canadian dubs. It's not a case of personal dislike of translation. Ocean is inconsistant with Hasbro and Tomy simple as that. Ocean is even inconsistant within it's own work, CC and /Zero were both done by the Ocean company (CC under the Blue Water Studios, one of Ocean's Studios) and we've got Saber and Zaber and guess what, the Zaber (the Zoid, not team!!!) are called both Tigers and Fangs by pilots.

Now, looking at Brad vs. Ballad, Brad is what is used to name the tiny figure inside my Command wolf AC action figure (the little toy not Model) and as I said before, I take printed US sources before Canadian translations (English games I'm a bit leary about as stated above) so using Brad vs. Ballad

And who's to say that a voice actor's improv for a name happened to catch on? What if Ocean changed the planned NAR name while writing script or recording? Working in film I know alot of this stuff happens.


The wiki does NOT use fan-based opinion as a judge.

And how might I ask you define popularity (concerning names and rules) if NOT through fan-base? Sales? Those are generally fan-based. Veiwers? Fan-based. Number of Wiki Editors? Unless you work for Tomy Hasbro insert whatever company here, it's most likely Fan-based.

Another thing, there's been alot of harping (mostly by leon) about the citation my edits, that's why I'm making more edits on talk pages. gotta go tildetildetildesquiggle


Me again Sylvanelite 23:07, April 9, 2011 (UTC)

Uhhh... not sure what =/= means. And, unless I've got a freakish case of sudden color blindness, my Zaber Fang model is blinding yellow, as is the one on the English Battle legends and the one on /Zero. How about your models?
- Usually =/= is "not equals". So Slax would be saying non-model does not mean non-cannon. He also stated that CC calls non-yellow variants Zaber Fangs. Your point would be correct if all versions of "Zaber Fang" were yellow in all media. They are not.
Just take a look at the average Zoid page around here, most have a stats sheet. NAR boxes only have weight, depth, hieght and max speed (or at least the 23 NAR boxes I own, if you have some please take a look) but no weapons, battle story or equipment, and in many cases no actual faction name, just the faction logo.
- The rules only apply when there is conflicting translations. If weapon stats are only available in Japanese, the Japanese names will be used. In the example you've raised, the rules would not mask out information, it only provides a reliable way of translating the information. For example, battle story is Japanese only. Any names that appear in Battle Story, which have an official translation elsewhere, will use the official translation. None of the information from battle story will be removed. In the case of Battle Story, the only two alternatives are fan-translations or using names consistent with other media. Fan translations cause arguments. Official media resolves them.
Battle Legends (which isn't a very good source due to the player's ability to upgrade Zoids) has one or two standard weapon names, sure, but most of the other info missing.
- The stats in the info boxes are from the original Zoid boxes, if the games conflict with this, the game's alternate stats will be listed elsewhere.
Without Japanese models and games and battle story this would be an inconsistant anime wiki.
- Like I said before, anime sections are sections. Models and other media (e.g. games) are sections. The information in one section should not alter the information in another. The only thing the rules do is provide a way of translating Japanese media that avoids arguments.
Now, looking at Brad vs. Ballad, Brad is what is used to name the tiny figure inside my Command wolf AC action figure (the little toy not Model) and as I said before, I take printed US sources before Canadian translations (English games I'm a bit leary about as stated above) so using Brad vs. Ballad
- But why does the name from a tiny figure inside a command wolf AC take priority over: the anime, the games, the HMM model kit, etc.
And who's to say that a voice actor's improv for a name happened to catch on? What if Ocean changed the planned NAR name while writing script or recording? Working in film I know alot of this stuff happens.
- And your saying that if something does catch on, and (for argument's sake) 99% of people know it by the improv name, why should we use a totally different name that only 1% of people know? This is a VERY typical example of an argument. For example, there is Palty vs Party. The argument starts the minutes someone says "the Palty translation in XYZ is wrong because..." In this case, the fan starts to justify why "Party" should be used. They can provide a reasonably good argument for "Party". Then another fan comes along and provides and equally good reason for "Palty". We are now stuck. Nobody can settle the debate, not even admins. (unless admins have a particular bias, but generally we don't). The only way to settle this argument is to simply stop the debate at "the Palty translation in XYZ is wrong because..." with the response of: "The Palty translation is correct because, for whatever reason, it was Palty in official Zoids media". The argument does not break out, because people aren't debating which person improved more or who's improv was more faithful to the original, etc.
And how might I ask you define popularity (concerning names and rules) if NOT through fan-base? Sales? Those are generally fan-based. Veiwers? Fan-based. Number of Wiki Editors? Unless you work for Tomy Hasbro insert whatever company here, it's most likely Fan-based.
- Sales figures and viewership information are not fan-based. For example Zoids Assault American sales data. This is not influenced by how many forums a fan signs up for, or things like that. And as clarification, on other issues like "are the models more popular than the anime", we usually won't use popularity as a measure, because model sales are very hard to come by and misleading (online sales and re-sale through sites like ebay, can constitute the majority of sales of a model). We would use popularity usually for games, since their sales data is more available.
Another thing, there's been alot of harping (mostly by leon) about the citation my edits, that's why I'm making more edits on talk pages. gotta go tildetildetildesquiggle
- We have to now, a while ago there was a huge string of vandalism on the wiki, users inserted totally false information into hard-to-cite pages, which went unchanged because nobody had citations. Using the talk pages as you are is a very good thing, and I strongly encourage the use of talk pages.

Now for the last thing I'll mention here, because I've used it a lot so far. This is what I'm using as a guideline for changes to the rules:

1) Should be able to side with either Party or Palty, unambiguously.

2) The same ruling that decided Party or Palty should side with Brad over Ballad.

The current rules do that, and it is a major strength. A proposed change to the rules should as a minimum meet these two criteria. These criteria are a minimum, not a maximum. If someone has a problem with these criteria, you can read my justifications in the posts above. Sylvanelite 23:07, April 9, 2011 (UTC) (Slax's reply starts here:)

@Cheironyx:

I guess it depends on the size of the release and amount of supporting material.... It's hard to quantify...Finding a definition for this is even harder.. Quality is important too.

I know it is hard, that's why I keep asking it. If it were an easy thing to create, I would have updated the rules already. Until this issues is resolved, I cannot side with the rule being updated.

..and the Japanese material is a more reliable source in most cases than the English material.

Yes, but fantranslations of Japanese sources are not. This rationale is really only valid if we litterly write in Japanese. (btw: yes, if there are Italian names, we should mention them, but the point I was more making is we don't, and never will, use them as a page's Title)
on popularity, there's a burden of proof issue there, if something sold, we know it had market penetration of X. To then say this penetration =/= popularity, would require a citation. Because this citation can't be made (due to the reasons you point out), then sales figures are vaild guages of popularity.

@anon:

Considering Admins

Drop it. This isn't worth starting a flame war over. Leon makes mistakes. Deal with it. I do.

Uhhh... not sure what =/= means.

"not equals"

...How about your models?

Watch Chaotic Century. Also: Zero calls them Saber Tigers in the dubbing.

these were just factors to consider...

This is a re-iteration of the question I just asked you, not an answer. The fact that you are still unable to answer reaffirms to me that the rule is subjective. Again, I propose the Decalto Dragon as a case study.

Without Japanese models and games and battle story this would be an inconsistant anime wiki.

True, but irrelevant. No-one is stating that content should be changed. this referrs to the title.

Yeah man, I read that about specific varients, glad you noticed my whole campaign about how Title can lead getting varients mixed up.

Dude, they were screwed up well before this rule was made. 4chan has a word for this kind of comment: newfag. Obviously, that is an offensive term, so I am trying to give it a context, to make it as not offensive as possible, but really, these kinds of statements reflect a great deal of ignorance on how this wiki was written.

...the Zaber (the Zoid, not team!!!) are called both Tigers and Fangs by pilots.

You do realise that what you've done here is: 1-assumed that Zaber is a specific version of Tiger, 2- use this assumption to say that Zaber =/= Tiger and then 3- use this conclusion to state that the Dub is inconsistent, but the only reason 1 works is because you've excluded the Dub because of 3- see the circular logic? Whereas if you assume that Zaber and tiger are just two names for the same Zoid, then all these inconsistencies vanish. Of course, even without circular logic, the dub is official, and your assumptions are fanmade.

Now, looking at...

Once again proving how your rule is utterly subjective. This is why I keep asking for a definition of how to measure quantity and qulaity of information.

What if Ocean changed the planned NAR name while writing script or recording?

This happens in text as well. What's your point?

And how might I ask you define popularity (concerning names and rules) if NOT through fan-base? Sales? Those are generally fan-based. Veiwers? Fan-based.

No. They are demographic based. there's a difference. demographics are easily cited, "fans" are not, as to be a fan inferr having degree of liking, something which is incredibly difficult to measure. Sales data is most often produced by suppliers of Zoids products. Not the demanders. Slax01 01:53, April 10, 2011 (UTC)


if Sheterma is a valid romanisation and Stormer has never been written outside of Japanese characters, then your rules say go with Sheterma.

I've seen one official source for Sheterma and none for Störmer, so yes, it should be changed. But nobody has argued for "Sheterma" before now, just like nobody has argued for "Ballad" over "Brad" despite more sources for "Ballad".

Just because it "shouldn't" be done, doesn't mean it can't be done. In fact, as far as fan translations go, there was a long time ago, several fans who while translating the boxes for models, added in stats that never appeared on the original text.

Then it's not a valid translation. You can claim "seibaa taigaa" translates to "Zaber Fang", but it doesn't. Zaber Fang is a new name, not an actual translation.

According to your own logic, the "Zenebas" translation shouldn't be used, because that only exists in the anime. It should be ゼネバス (Zenebasu).

Wrong.

So, you'll deny that the anime is popular?

No, I was denying what Slax said: "Yes, but they [the models] are a weak and frail backbone that would collapse under their own weight if not held together by the muscle mass of the anime series." The anime is not our number-one source of information on Zoids.

If you want to keep spouting that it's 100% unambiguous, go ahead, but even the page you linked to states problems with that approach. ...A romanisation is ANY version of a word whereby it is written in english characters. ...A translation captures the meaning of the word.

A romanisation is a word using a foreign script, rewritten in English script. Yes, it's ambiguous, but what's on the Japanese boxes is NOT always a romanisation - for example, "Elepantus". Until you can find a word where "pa" is pronounced "fa", "Elepantus" is not a valid romanisation of エレファンタス. More importantly for the rules, the OJR Custmize Sets are written as 改造セット, so the romanisation would be Kaizou Set or kaizou setto. Custmize Set is a (mis)-translation to English. Custmize takes priority over Kaizou. Do you get my point?

The "popularity" referenced to in the rules is simple stuff. Legacy sold less copies than there were viewers of New Century.

But without knowing how many people played Legacy ROMs or hired New Century DVDs, those figures don't necessarily reflect which names people will recognise, which is the only purpose of using the figures. "Which spelling appears more often in official media" is less subjective than "which spelling is more widely recognised by the general public". That's a fact.

The NJR can't reliably be used, if it could, these rules would not exist. ...If fans do the translations themselves, there will be arguments. If we use official translations then that is unambiguous.

Yes, but fantranslations of Japanese sources are not. This rationale is really only valid if we litterly write in Japanese.

You both missed what I'm trying to propose as the rule - use the ENGLISH spellings given in JAPANESE sources, which are in general more consistent than the English spellings used in ENGLISH sources. Basically, my plan swaps the current rules 1 and 2.

The same ruling that decided Party or Palty should side with Brad over Ballad.

Party is not written in English in an official source. Palty is. All rule systems proposed so far choose Palty over Party, unambiguously. As for the Ballad thing, Ballad is written in English in an official source. Therefore, claiming Ballad is absolutely wrong is fan opinion ;)

Cheironyx 08:44, April 10, 2011 (UTC)

My reply: Sylvanelite 11:56, April 10, 2011 (UTC)

I've seen one official source for Sheterma and none for Störmer, so yes, it should be changed. But nobody has argued for "Sheterma" before now, just like nobody has argued for "Ballad" over "Brad" despite more sources for "Ballad".
You said "So? The current rules would mean that Störmer should be moved to Sheterma." if that is a criticism of the current rules, and your proposed rules DO NOT address this criticism, then there is not benefit to making the change. Additionally, I already outlined the difference between Stormer and Brad. Stormer has NEVER been scrutinised, Brad's page has been scrutinised MANY TIMES. The reason nobody has argued for "Sheterma" is a DIFFERENT reason to why nobody has argued for Ballad. Nobody has argued for Sheterma because there was no debate. In Brad's case, there was ample debate (surname, surname spelling, age) but Ballad has never been suggested.
Then it's not a valid translation. You can claim "seibaa taigaa" translates to "Zaber Fang", but it doesn't. Zaber Fang is a new name, not an actual translation.
- It is a valid translation because Hasbro (or was it Tomy) ACTUALLY MADE THAT TRANSLATION. They ACTUALLY translated Saber Tiger into Zaber Fang, and is WHY the Zaber Fang name exists.
Wrong.
- Yeah. From that article: ZENEVAS and ZENEBAS. I know you were probably only talking about the pictures, but the text spells it out pretty clearly.


A romanisation is a word using a foreign script, rewritten in English script. Yes, it's ambiguous, but...
- No buts. Ambiguous rules will not be accepted.
"Elepantus" is not a valid romanisation of エレファンタス
- Yes it is actually a romanisation, but it may not be a standard romanisation. Again, the wiki page you linked to spells this out.
Custmize takes priority over Kaizou
- The current rules already make that ruling. If there is no change in ruling, I see no need to change the rules.
But without knowing how many people played Legacy ROMs or hired New Century DVDs, those figures don't necessarily reflect which names people will recognise, which is the only purpose of using the figures.
- The "only purpose" is to be unambiguous. Slax worded it quite well, the data is an indicator of supply not demand.
"Which spelling appears more often in official media" is less subjective than "which spelling is more widely recognised by the general public". That's a fact.
Three things: 1)"more often" results in Ballad over Brad. 2)"more often" is to defy common sense. It means names are used based on who can find more obscure media that support their version. Obscure is the opposite of common. I will not be enforcing rules that defy common sense. 3)"which spelling is more widely recognised by the general public" is not the current ruling.
You both missed what I'm trying to propose as the rule - use the ENGLISH spellings given in JAPANESE sources, which are in general more consistent than the English spellings used in ENGLISH sources. Basically, my plan swaps the current rules 1 and 2.
- And you've missed what I've been saying since the start. This change gives Ballad over Brad.
Party is not written in English in an official source. Palty is. All rule systems proposed so far choose Palty over Party, unambiguously.
- As I said before: The current rules already make that ruling. If there is no change in ruling, I see no need to change the rules.
As for the Ballad thing, Ballad is written in English in an official source.
- So is Brad and Barad. In fact, I already told you Ballad was used in offical English sources, Legacy, the NC0 DVDs. Pointing out something I already said does not counter my points, it enforces them.
Therefore, claiming Ballad is absolutely wrong is fan opinion ;)
- Except that to use Ballad for the Brad page would be to go against common sense. In fact, the point that you've argued this much for Ballad is a clear indicator that Ballad is not the common sense ruling. This is because you've not been arguing for Ballad, but arguing against the rules that support Brad, while the name Brad itself originates from the anime, and all other appearances of that character have been in reference to the anime, which means the anime in the primary source. Your reasoning for your rule changes is that the primary sources for Zoids should be used (the Japanese). So by your own logic, the same reasoning (but not your rules derived from your reasoning) should also give Brad over Ballad (Brad being the original anime, ballad being the derived incorrect name) however, they arrive at Ballad instead, meaning your reasoning does no even support your own rulings.

P.S. I always indent replies. I assume from the summary text that you are using the rich text editor? I don't use it, and the rules suggest turning it off. But I've put this line here to un-indent my text anyway =D (this ends my reply) Sylvanelite 11:56, April 10, 2011 (UTC)


"You both missed"

I wasn't going to reply here, since my concerns were not addressed, but if you're going to assert that I missed the point, than I shall simply point out a few observations you have overlooked, and see if this "missing" claim is true or not.
Premise #1:

"use the ENGLISH spellings given in JAPANESE sources, which are in general"

Missed issue #1: Rules are never applied in general cases.
Premise #2:

"more consistent than the English spellings used in ENGLISH sources."

Missed issue #2- the already mentioned circular logic of Zaber Fang "inconsistency".
Conclusion:

"Basically, my plan swaps the current rules 1 and 2."

Unfortunately a conclusion without any premises is no conclusion at all. Therefore, I never addressed it. And I still don't, because, as you can see, I took a look at your proposal, saw that the premises used to support that proposal had issues, and asked you questions to get you to address those issues. but instead of answers, VOILA! I get accused of missing the point. I am more than happy to implement your rule, but PLEASE address the issues first. (PS: in standard text editor, a simple linebreak will remove indentations. It is for these reasons I have recommend not to use rich text editor)

Slax01 12:57, April 10, 2011 (UTC)

I'll keep this as short as I can:
1. Sheterma was not an argument for my rules, it was an argument against saying Brad automatically takes priority. As for Palty, I didn't bring the name up or argue it, I just responded to it.

2. Better illustration of what I mean: Pteras -> Ptera Striker. The "Striker" bit was not in the katakana. It was not in the romanisation (translation) on the Japanese box. It is an extra part fabricated by Hasbro. Ptera Striker is therefore NOT a translation of Pteras, it is a new name loosely based on Pteras. Same with Saber Tiger -> Zaber Fang.

3. You seemed to be implying that "Zenebas" was never written in English, so I showed that it was. "Zenevas" is also used, but "Zenebas" is more common.

4. "Use the most popular version" is an ambiguous rule. Sales figures do not directly equal popularity. If nothing else, rewrite the rules page more clearly.

5. The wiki page I linked to, and the various pages it links to, confirm that the romanisation of ファ is "fa". "Pa" is パ only. I don't see anything on the page allowing ファ to be romanised "pa", even in a non-standard system. Therefore, Elepantus is not a romanisation of エレファンタス, just as Zaber Fang is not a translation of Saber Tiger.

6. The current rules say "romanisation". Kaizou -> Custmize is translation, not romanisation. Either the examples or the word "romanisation" needs fixing.

7. Brad is based on the English dub. Ballad is based on the Japanese original. Brad is not a valid romanisation of Ballad. I do indeed say that the primary, original sources should be used. Ultra Saurus had a decent amount of discussion before I moved it to Ultrasaurus, but nobody thought to bring up that the space is only in the NJR name. Plus, multiple English sources and English-speaking fans have used the spelling Ballad over Brad, so it doesn't necessarily "go against common sense" to use Ballad. I think you can guess where I stand on this. (By the way, in terms of personal opinion, I don't care which name gets used. I'm just arguing for Ballad to support my other reasoning.)

8. Thanks for un-indenting ;)

Premise 1: It's the premise that's "in general", not the rule. A major premise for the current rules is that "in general, more fans recognise the English-source spelling over the Japanese-source spelling", resulting in rule number one: "If an English-source spelling exists it should always be used". My system is no less flawed than the current one.

Premise 2: The Zaber Fang is an example, not the entire case. As a better example, English sources use Gordosaur (NAR), Great Gorgon (OER), Gordox (RS), Gordos (anime) and also use Gordos for the Godos. EVERY Japanese source uses Gordos, and only for Gordos. When a Zoid is given a different name in different Japanese sources, it is always due to a model or stats difference (well, except for Mechabonica, which had no stats). Cheironyx 13:34, April 10, 2011 (UTC)


For Shetermer. It's never been scrutinised. It's not like Brad. I have said this multiple times. There is no analogy.

You point number 2 is providing (fan) reasons why (official) translations are "invalid". This logic causes arguments. Let me give you a rundown on why you are wrong about the translation issue. There are always two ways to perform translations, faithful and fluent. Take the phrase "the lord is my shepherd", translating this into a language that doesn't have the word "shepherd" can give either: "the lord is my person who moves sheep" or "the lord is my leader". The first one is faithful, the second one is fluent. Your logic only holds up for faithful translations, and claims fluent translations are invalid. When in fact, they are valid translations. Your logic would use "person who moves sheep" over "leader".

Point 3 and 4 was just showing how your rule prefers finding obscure media over common media, and even then, you haven't reliably shown that Zenebas is used "more" than Zenevas, which would be required under your rules.

Point 5. Let me re-quote the exact text I used before: Names can be subject to even more variation, with spellings depending on the individual's preference. For example, the manga artist Yasuhiro Nightow's family name would be more conventionally written in Hepburn romanization as Naitō.

Point 6 and 7. Your definitions of Romanisation and Translation aren't correct. "published Japanese media which uses English letters" is listed in the rules, and is sufficient. Sylvanelite 21:38, April 10, 2011 (UTC)