Corrections
As I was saying, your translation doesn't really have a very good flow to it, so it's a bit hard to piece together what's talking about the legend and what is referring specifically to Archer. Just state here what I did wrong, and I'll attempt to correct it instead of just going back to the start. EGGS 00:32, July 30, 2010 (UTC)
- When I write that "he lived in slanders but died as a hero" it means HE LIVED IN SLANDERS BUT DIED AS A HERO. It'd be really damn nice if you didn't rewrite it as "he died a nameless vigilante". In this case, it should be more explicitely taken as "he achieved the status of Heroic Spirit as Robin Hood", but there's already a huge gap between my phrase and your rewrite.
- This is one example and what struck me the most with a quick glance, but I hope we could at least agree that you don't flat out change the meaning of the text. I'm sorry but when I see a rewrite of that magnitude, I'm definitely not going to pick things apart, it all goes to the dump. I did my work translating it to begin with, I don't exactly want to pick it apart again when you rewrite it. If you really want to rewrite it, you take it in your hands to not fuck it up. It may not "flow" very well, but it's what the game wrote of it, and quite frankly I'll take the badly written quote of the game anyday rather than a rewrite with shiny fonts that fuck up the meaning like that. The TM fandom has enough misconceptions and misinterpretations as it is.
- As for telling apart what's the legend and what's the person, it's not like the text was separated between the background of the Heroic Spirit and the life of the person called Robin Hood !! --Byakko 01:02, July 30, 2010 (UTC)
- I reached that sentence from modifying the part where he died "nameless, unrewarded." I used "unrewarded" in a previous sentence, so rather than just simply end it "nameless" I added something to flavor it up a bit. That's not really that much of a stretch, and in no way does it deny that he became a heroic spirit. It just shows how pathetic his situation was at the time of his death, which is exactly what your translation is painting throughout. I could easily just add something like "after being the target of slander in order to protect the peace of the village" or something before that final part if you need something a bit more heroic. If that's your largest gripe, I'm really not seeing the point of the hissy fit. EGGS 01:11, July 30, 2010 (UTC)
- No, your version does not say anything about achieving heroic status through death regardless of his failure - and just saying "he did protect the peace of the village" has nothing of that. If you want to see the point of my hissy fit, you might as well shove a hedgehog in your mouth if you think I'll post what I have of Vlad Tepes, Gawain and the others. If you want to make shit up, you don't need my translations for that. --Byakko 07:25, July 30, 2010 (UTC)
- "He had spent his life hiding his weapons, face, and pride, fighting vile battles, and going unrewarded in order to keep fighting as the hero the villagers wished for so deeply." isn't enough to confirm that he was a hero? Do you wish for every Servant article to actually say "and then, they ascended to the Throne of Heroes/Moon thing in Fate/Extra"? Again, this seems to be nothing but nitpicking that can easily be fixed rather than something to warrant you flipping out. I really don't get why exactly you're being so damn hostile. Do you not understand that the point of a wiki is to achieve the desired information through a series of edits? EGGS 08:38, July 30, 2010 (UTC)
- No, your version does not say anything about achieving heroic status through death regardless of his failure - and just saying "he did protect the peace of the village" has nothing of that. If you want to see the point of my hissy fit, you might as well shove a hedgehog in your mouth if you think I'll post what I have of Vlad Tepes, Gawain and the others. If you want to make shit up, you don't need my translations for that. --Byakko 07:25, July 30, 2010 (UTC)
- I reached that sentence from modifying the part where he died "nameless, unrewarded." I used "unrewarded" in a previous sentence, so rather than just simply end it "nameless" I added something to flavor it up a bit. That's not really that much of a stretch, and in no way does it deny that he became a heroic spirit. It just shows how pathetic his situation was at the time of his death, which is exactly what your translation is painting throughout. I could easily just add something like "after being the target of slander in order to protect the peace of the village" or something before that final part if you need something a bit more heroic. If that's your largest gripe, I'm really not seeing the point of the hissy fit. EGGS 01:11, July 30, 2010 (UTC)
OK, let me see if I can moderate this. First of all, Byakko please calm down your temper. I think told you this before, but you get easily offended even when people give you little reason to. Being this aggressive is nothing but counter-productive. That being said, EGGS I have to agree with him on the matter that there is an issue on how you do things. I checked around your contributions and, though you did a good job bringing in quality pics for this Wiki, I can't say the same about the written data. Most of those are just rephrases of what is already there that don't actually add up to anything. In fact some even removed existing data. I don't known how things are in other wikis, but here people like to follow a few unspoken rules about data management.
- Never add any data when you can't accurately indicate a source.
- When importing data from reliable sources, always keep the text faithful to said sources. Don't add up nor remove anything.
- Keep things as short and direct as possible. Things like "the flow is not good" or "add some flavor" are not good enough reasons to make edits on any page around here.
Since you're relatively new, its okay if you mess up a couple of times. But when people call up to you, please quickly review your actions. Libra00 09:40, July 30, 2010 (UTC)
- Generally, the information is already present within the articles, so there is really little to do besides reformat them to better the presentation and add any little bits of missing information. If there are any instances where I have actually completely removed something important, feel free to point it out. I'll do better to avoid doing so in the future, though I don't believe I could have ever missed more than a sentence or two. Even if I do screw something up, the good thing about a wiki is that the information can quickly be corrected, such as by pointing problems out on a talk page, rather than having everything go back to zero because of a couple of minor mistakes. Having someone say, "I believe the word "vigilante" doesn't really convey Robin Hood's status as a hero" would be much better than swearing. EGGS 14:29, July 30, 2010 (UTC)
- The thing is just reformatting for the sake of presentation is something that people can take in a bad way around here. Just as an example, think what would be like if you put a really great effort into translating an article and suddenly discovers that your work was heavily edited for whatever reason. Also, I must warn you again that people around here really put faithfulness to sources above anything else. If you ask them to choose between a text with bad presentation but faithful to a reliable source and one that has a good presentation but somewhat deviates from its sources, most people would chose the former in a heartbeat.
- As for pointing out specific examples, your recent changes in the page Gradation Air bothers me a little. Let me take this occasion to let you know that I intend to throughly review that when I have more time. Libra00 19:16, July 30, 2010 (UTC)
- Well, seeing as this is a wiki rather than Fuyuki, it makes sense that anything placed here can reasonably be chopped apart and put back together on a moment's notice. It's something you have to get used to while editing on sites like these. With the exception of the Fate/Extra articles, it's not like I'm doing this only off the top of my head. I've gone back to check F/Z and F/SN a number of times while editing. I just looked through Gradation Air a second time myself, and I see nothing important that is missing from the text other than a few minor things better suited to Shirou's article, like the gun metaphor. EGGS 21:01, July 30, 2010 (UTC)
- Making things easier to read is fine and even encouraged, just make sure it's not done on the text that was translated directly from official source, such as Plus Period, Character Material or official websites. Those especially tend to have hard-to-understand or ambiguous sentences, but that's how they were in the original, and are usually ambiguous on purpose (blame Nasu for that). We've had a fair share of "edits" on those that aimed to make them more readable, but ultimately were personal interpretations that changed their meaning. That being said, Byakko never sourced the article text, so we have no idea where he translated it from and how official it is... --Azaghal 22:46, July 30, 2010 (UTC)
- Well, seeing as this is a wiki rather than Fuyuki, it makes sense that anything placed here can reasonably be chopped apart and put back together on a moment's notice. It's something you have to get used to while editing on sites like these. With the exception of the Fate/Extra articles, it's not like I'm doing this only off the top of my head. I've gone back to check F/Z and F/SN a number of times while editing. I just looked through Gradation Air a second time myself, and I see nothing important that is missing from the text other than a few minor things better suited to Shirou's article, like the gun metaphor. EGGS 21:01, July 30, 2010 (UTC)
- I checked it. It's a pretty straight translation from the original text.
I see how this is a bit of a touchy subject, I figured i would ask before blundering in and making edits, but seeing as the game is "officially translated and readable is it all right to start entering information from the game itself or are we gonna be purist about it? I'm new to this particular wiki and figured I would help out where im needed, when I can. TheEncounter 13:55, January 1, 2012 (UTC)
Source
On a side note, could you indicate me to your sources on the Fate/Extra's Servants. I've been searching around for any kind of extensive data about them, but all I managed to find was some poor screenshots of the game. Libra00 09:13, July 30, 2010 (UTC)
Article Name
The article name is Robin Hood, and there's a few others like Vlad III... However you don't see articles called Diarmuid or Cu Chulainn, instead it's Lancer (Fate/Stay Night), Lancer (Fate/Zero). So shouldn't this be Archer (Fate/EXTRA)? Or are you going to keep it like this because of the repeats of servant classes? (Like the two Saber's in the game) 205.206.16.197 20:52, July 31, 2010 (UTC)
- Actually, all Fate/Extra articles are in infancy, so there definitely is some discrepancy in naming (both Vlad III and Lancer (Fate/Extra) articles exist). We do, however, have a "Gilgamesh", rather than "Archer (Fate/Zero)" article. Still, Gilgamesh never hid his identity, while identities of the Fate/Extra servants are definitely spoilers.
I suggest we make three "Playable Class (Fate/Extra)" articles for playable servants and seven (eight with Saver) other "Class (Fate/Extra)" articles, and put servants of the same class in the same article. Not the best solution, but I can't think of any more elegant way to handle this. Any suggestions? --Azaghal 00:19, August 1, 2010 (UTC)
Last try
The first guy who wrecks this with rewrites, I'll push my hand through my monitor, it will reach across the Internet toward him, come out of his screen, and I will throw a phenomenal bitchslap across his face.
My suggestion : put whatever you want, rewrite whatever you want in the first sections, but always keep a section for direct, unaltered translations. Same goes with everything else, like Noble Phantasms or Magic or any spell. This is important. This is the only thing that directly comes from the game, and wheer we're absolutely sure it's not a stupid, unsourced interpretation by some random guy on the Internet. Well, of course, we're never absolutely sure, since I or anyone else can very well translate things in a retarded way with stupid mistakes, but that's still much better than people scavenging bits off all the time, leaving in the end something that has nothing to do with the original text.
Anyway, that's the last time I'm touching this place. --Byakko 09:15, August 9, 2010 (UTC)
- Considering the history of this article, its probably best if I give some heads up warning: I am currently in the middle of a project involving translating all the Servant-related data in this page. Of course, the time will come when I will also review this one. That being said, if anyone has any issues please tell me now. --Libra00 22:21, November 26, 2010 (UTC)
- I have an issue, don't use translations of translations. --Byakko 09:46, November 27, 2010 (UTC)
- What the fuck did I just say --Byakko 12:44, November 28, 2010 (UTC)
- You said that you did not wanted me to use "translations of translations", and I did stick with that. That text is a whole new translation that I did directly from the original in Japanese. --Libra00 12:59, November 28, 2010 (UTC)
- And you had to do a shitty job at it. Screw that-- I first wanted only translation of official text, then a debate went on rephrasing and adding comments, and I finally compromised and added more comment for more info on my own, and now you remove it all, even my straight-up translation of the exact same text ? What the hell ? Why don't you tell me to fuck off and never bother coming again, it'll have the same result. --Byakko 08:55, November 29, 2010 (UTC)
- You and your temper... why do you have to get so mad over something like this? At any rate, this is why I asked BEFORE HAND which issues people would have with me reviewing this, and the only answer that I got was about "translations of translation". So I thought: "Ok, so there shouldn't be any problems if I stick to just properly translating the original text..."
- Granted, maybe I shouldn't have been so quick in removing that part of the text. But, since nobody said anything when I asked I thought it would be fine. Also, most of what was actually removed were the likes of game playthrough. Even though I had to re-write a little to fit it with the new text, old data relevant to Archer himself is still available in the article. Also, regarding your translations, I only touched it because I noticed a few mistakes that couldn't be left alone. Although I will apologize if it makes you mad, I still had to correct them regardless. --Libra00 11:53, November 29, 2010 (UTC)
- And you had to do a shitty job at it. Screw that-- I first wanted only translation of official text, then a debate went on rephrasing and adding comments, and I finally compromised and added more comment for more info on my own, and now you remove it all, even my straight-up translation of the exact same text ? What the hell ? Why don't you tell me to fuck off and never bother coming again, it'll have the same result. --Byakko 08:55, November 29, 2010 (UTC)
- You said that you did not wanted me to use "translations of translations", and I did stick with that. That text is a whole new translation that I did directly from the original in Japanese. --Libra00 12:59, November 28, 2010 (UTC)
- What the fuck did I just say --Byakko 12:44, November 28, 2010 (UTC)
- I have an issue, don't use translations of translations. --Byakko 09:46, November 27, 2010 (UTC)
Yew Tree Bounded Field
I have a quick question: With what did he summon the Yew Tree? Was it with the Yew Bow itself, or was it brought about by his Faceless May King "Noble Phantasm", so called? I know his Noble Phantasm depicts the Yew Tree being created ON his enemy, then exploding, but I'm wondering if Faceless May King has the power to create the Yew Tree, like Nursery Rhyme had the ability to deploy the Jabberwock or the Nameless Forest. I understand it's probably his bow, but I'd like to be sure. Zahadrin (talk) 03:08, February 25, 2014 (UTC)
Faceless King
- In the game, Archer has a technique with this name which reverses the relationship between the GUARD, BREAK and ATTACK options. The effect would only last for 1 turn.
It's not really that, apparently the skill changes what you chose so it'll always lose. I was experimenting earlier with save states. It won't work if you use a skill, heh. Sandubadear (talk) 02:39, September 8, 2014 (UTC)
Archer in the Throne of Heroes
Hello there. I just recently dive back into the lore of Fate and now, I'll probably sound weird but I need some clarification please : Was this particular Robin Hood placed in the Throne of Heroes because the people aknowledge him as the original Robin Hood? If so, I guess his true identity will never be discussed as he is, for the legends, one of the Robin Hoods?... the Throne probably has many Robin Hoods up there, each with their own background, deeds and Noble Phantasms!
I wonder if there are other Heroic Spirits like this now, many individuals being "canonized" as the same hero. Hitsuji Mamoru (talk) 20:59, May 15, 2016 (UTC)
- I don't think Robin Hood is ever mentioned in the context of the Throne, just in the context of the Moon Cell. However, the Nasu version of Robin Hood seems similar to the Hassans, in that they are multiple different people operating under one legacy identity. If they are like the Hassans, the Robin Hoods (this one included) are likely Heroic Spirit Candidates, wraiths who are unable to reach the Throne of Heroes due to their anonymous nature, but still linger around and can be summoned under special circumstances.--Otherarrow (talk) 22:08, May 15, 2016 (UTC)
- Thank you for the fast answer Otherarrow (lol fitting name). That's what I thought about him, being similar to the Hassans, thanks for clarifying. However, I think we can consider Robin Hood was summoned from the Throne since he appears in Fate/Grand Order (the Moon Cell doesn't impact the story of this game I think ?) Hitsuji Mamoru (talk) 05:51, May 16, 2016 (UTC)