Talk:Redemption (Gackt song)
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Redemption (Gackt song) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | Songs Unassessed | ||||||
| |||||||
Redirect
Please discuss there if you have any question regarding the redirect. See also Talk:Eyes On Me#Please don't merge. Kariteh 12:24, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
- So noted, though I prefer to discuss the issue right here, in order to attract a broader and less FF-centered view on the issue (with regards to the WP:OWN-related concerns that came up in the "Eyes on Me" discussion). I have reverted the merge, because this article has been worked on by about a dozen individual editors, for over a year and it got merged into another one within ten hours of the initial proposal,[1] [2] which is hardly an appropriate time for thorough consensus building. Also, we do not break consistency within articles dealing with one field (in this case single releases by Gackt, linked through their infobox chronology), merely for the sake of achieving consistency for another (the per game/main entry approach for FF soundtracks). Saying that one enjoys a higher priority than the other would hardly be WP:NPOV compliant.
- Gackt is a notable artist, also quite successful I am told, hence his releases, i.e. albums and singles have standalone notability and fall under the scope of WP:ALBUMS and WP:SONGS, respecively. A commercial tie-in with a video game does not change that, quite the contrary, actually.
- It would be unfair and also somewhat beside the point to list the current deficits of Music of Final Fantasy VII, so I'm merely going to state that absorbing (and in some cases repeating) as much data as possible, does not make a good article. Consolidation may help, yes, but petty turf wars between WikiProjects certainly don't. What I'm proposing is to put this article under the scope of both relevant WikiProjects and make use of the respective See also entries and categories. - Cyrus XIII 13:44, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
- I agree that this merge was a little hasty and in this case, Music of FFVII isn't even GA-quality so it's even harder to justify merging. However, I believe that a merge is the ultimate goal but not appropriate yet. If you'll notice, Music of FFVII is also in WP:ALBUMS and WP:SONGS so I don't really see any "turf war" type thing going on. Axem Titanium 14:26, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
- I'm removing the WPFF tag. The single isn't Final Fantasy-related, but the song's relation to the game can be explained in the MoFF7 article. The same can be done to Eyes on Me. — Deckiller 15:15, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
- That "turf war" impression pretty much came from this page previously only being under the scope of the FF project (which struck me as rather limiting) and aforementioned WP:OWN concerns. The point is, no matter how well Music of Final Fantasy VII will shape up (and I hope it will, personally, I'm a big fan of that music), "Redemption" remains a song, released as a single by a notable artist and will therefore retain its standalone notability. And should the scope of Wikipedia coverage of Faye Wong's work reach a similar level, a standalone article for the song/single "Eyes on Me" will become just as viable again (see Passion (song)).
- Please note that I'm neutral on the per-game treatment given to those soundtrack albums. I just do not believe that the same approach should be taken for every bit of music to ever appear in these games. It just confuses readers who come to Wikipedia to read up on certain artists and not necessarily the media these artists may have contributed some of their work to, as part of a commercial tie-in. - Cyrus XIII 15:19, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
- As I've said in the Eyes On Me debate, just because it can have an article doesn't mean it should. By merging this, it strengthens Music of Final Fantasy VII but also the song information itself, giving a better context. You state it has had "dozens" of editors for "over a year" - yet there is only a track listing, infobox, and an introductory paragraph. By merging this, no work is lost. There is no good reason for Redemption to have an article, other than it "can" have an article. --Teggles 23:53, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
- And what contextual benefits might that be? Full capitalization of track names, at odds with the Manual of Style? A non-descriptive genre handle? An incorrect runtime of the single? How do catalog numbers improve a Wikipedia article - we are not trying to sell anything, are we? I've never played Dirge of Cerberus, yet it strikes me as a no-brainer to point out that atonement (or redemption) is a recurring theme in the character history of the game's protagonist. If you want context, please add some, right now there is only a pile of data that's being thrown at the reader. - Cyrus XIII 01:02, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
- ...your reply really makes no sense. First off you asked what contextual benefits there may be, then you mentioned a group of things that have nothing to do with context, and then answered your first question adequately. --Teggles 01:08, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
- By the way, I fixed all of the problems you mentioned, which were only a result of the previous article's (Redemption (song)) content. I did not change the genre. You claim the genre in Music of Final Fantasy VII, J-rock, is "non-descriptive", and yet you are using "Pop/rock" in this article. Pop/rock is a lot less descriptive than J-rock - "pop" can mean anything, and rock is broader than J-rock. --Teggles 01:19, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
- Yet the benefits which the subject of the song/single is supposed to gain via inclusion in the larger page still do not exist, that's what I was trying to point out in my previous post. So far, no efforts have been made to elaborate on any connection with the the game, that goes beyond "yeah, its on the soundtrack", hence its relevance to the game remains unclear. Also, chart positions usually need references and the second paragraph of the section remains largely redundant to the first. As for genres, "J-rock" is little more than rock music from Japan, probably performed in Japanese. I do not consider it in the reader's best interest to be directed to the country-specific coverage of a music genre (which in this case is a little more than a brief history) while they could familiarize themselves with actual musical characteristics on the more general articles (in this case Pop music and Rock music). This emphasis on nationality at nearly every turn when it comes to Japanese media always struck me as cruft. - Cyrus XIII 02:17, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
- You might want to read WP:WIP. --Teggles 02:33, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
- Yet the benefits which the subject of the song/single is supposed to gain via inclusion in the larger page still do not exist, that's what I was trying to point out in my previous post. So far, no efforts have been made to elaborate on any connection with the the game, that goes beyond "yeah, its on the soundtrack", hence its relevance to the game remains unclear. Also, chart positions usually need references and the second paragraph of the section remains largely redundant to the first. As for genres, "J-rock" is little more than rock music from Japan, probably performed in Japanese. I do not consider it in the reader's best interest to be directed to the country-specific coverage of a music genre (which in this case is a little more than a brief history) while they could familiarize themselves with actual musical characteristics on the more general articles (in this case Pop music and Rock music). This emphasis on nationality at nearly every turn when it comes to Japanese media always struck me as cruft. - Cyrus XIII 02:17, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
- And what contextual benefits might that be? Full capitalization of track names, at odds with the Manual of Style? A non-descriptive genre handle? An incorrect runtime of the single? How do catalog numbers improve a Wikipedia article - we are not trying to sell anything, are we? I've never played Dirge of Cerberus, yet it strikes me as a no-brainer to point out that atonement (or redemption) is a recurring theme in the character history of the game's protagonist. If you want context, please add some, right now there is only a pile of data that's being thrown at the reader. - Cyrus XIII 01:02, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
- As I've said in the Eyes On Me debate, just because it can have an article doesn't mean it should. By merging this, it strengthens Music of Final Fantasy VII but also the song information itself, giving a better context. You state it has had "dozens" of editors for "over a year" - yet there is only a track listing, infobox, and an introductory paragraph. By merging this, no work is lost. There is no good reason for Redemption to have an article, other than it "can" have an article. --Teggles 23:53, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
- I agree that this merge was a little hasty and in this case, Music of FFVII isn't even GA-quality so it's even harder to justify merging. However, I believe that a merge is the ultimate goal but not appropriate yet. If you'll notice, Music of FFVII is also in WP:ALBUMS and WP:SONGS so I don't really see any "turf war" type thing going on. Axem Titanium 14:26, 22 June 2007 (UTC)