Stop it. The Zantetsuken used in abilities called "Zantetsuken" are appearances of the Zantetsuken. It's the same thing so they share a page. 79.69.197.106 15:11, January 28, 2013 (UTC)
- Well, here's the thing. I disagree with the split for exactly what you said, but for some time before this, while I don't recall specific examples, I believe a couple of our weapon pages have been tagged due to Ninja-type enemies throwing that weapon in a game. So yeah, a bit of a double standard there. (EDIT - maybe not, I may have been mistaken) Nonetheless, agreed with JBed). Doreiku Kuroofangu 15:53, January 28, 2013 (UTC)
- Well, it seems there is a gray area when it comes to Excalibur - looking at the page for X-2's Warrior, all of its abilities are named after weapons, so we should treat them as abilities, not weapons. Doreiku Kuroofangu 15:57, January 28, 2013 (UTC)
- It's not really grey. If the ability is just them attacking with their equipped sword then that is reason to disambig (although then we have to make it clear on the disambig that abilities where the sword is used is covered on the recurring weapon page).
- But Gilgamesh and Odin do use weapons in abilities named after the weapon so they should be covered with the weapon. 79.69.197.106 16:09, January 28, 2013 (UTC)
Hey, I'm just following what was already set for Zantetsuken, so blame whoever split that and whatnot (that, and we were removing abilities from weapon pages anyways so...). | |||
I was aware it was done on Zantetsuken.
Because one scenario does something differently doesn't mean that it should be done like that for everything. Although I saw it get split way back when and didn't say anything apparently. I've just re-read the discussion that lead to Zantetsuken's split... eh.
I'm not interested in blaming anyone, I'm requesting it stops and abilities named after a weapon that appears in the animation be re-merged with the weapon articles.
Although now I question what the wiki wants to do. Maybe we should discuss. JBed (talk) 20:26, January 28, 2013 (UTC)
A good point was put though, regarding ninja stars. There is a great difference between some iterations of thrown items. Sometimes they are thrown items, others they are thrown weapons, the distinction being that sometimes they're equipment and other times, they aren't. The problem is the wiki makes no distinction, listing these thrown items at lists of weapons, when they cannot be equipped and thus are not the same as weapons. The same goes for common grenades versus hand-bombs from XII and RW. But since this is split weapons and items, it's off-topic.
Regarding abilties named and directly based on weapons, I say treat them as we treat enemies which are also summons at one point. - Henryacores^ 20:40, January 28, 2013 (UTC)
What would we do in the case of something like Excalibur, where it's an ability and NOT a weapon at all? I would assume that we wouldn't just put it on the Excalibur (Weapon) page, no? FFVI and FFX-2 both fall under this area for that (just an example. There MAY be others that fall under it as well). | |||
But VI is Gilgamesh's use of Excalibur, while in X-2 all Warrior elemental abilities' names derive from swords. - Henryacores^ 20:54, January 28, 2013 (UTC)
Aye, they do derive from swords, but we don't actually SEE the sword itself no? I mean, if it's not a weapon that is used at all, can it really be on the page?
| |||
It would be strange to split equipable appearances and non equipable appearances. If the sword that, say, Gligamesh is using in a boss fight is clearly meant to be Excalibur, then it's still an appearance of the sword named Excalibur, even if the player can never obtain it. HarpieSiren (talk) 18:23, January 29, 2013 (UTC)