Forum:Archetype definition (again)


 * So we know that for things like Knight, where there are support cards that specifically asks for "ナイト" (Naito), we can go all out and list everything that has that word in its name a "Knight" card.
 * However, what about the 'archetypes' like Monarch, Warriors and King; where there are no support cards?
 * Things like Alien Warrior and Magnet Warrior Sigma Plus are already being added to Warriors; while the the only reason why the page was even made in the first place was because "Warriors are a series of primarily Warrior-Type monsters which are used by Yusei Fudo."; not because their name contains "ウォリアー" (Warrior).
 * If this continues, Musician King could soon be added to Monarch because its name contains "帝", and Big Eye could soon be added to King because its name contains "王".
 * -Falzar FZ- (talk page|useful stuff) 13:41, July 25, 2011 (UTC)
 * There's a difference.--Wasn&#39;t (talk • contribs) 14:03, July 25, 2011 (UTC)


 * Sub-types don't matter when the reason that page was even created was because they are linked through Yusei Fudo. Not their name. -Falzar FZ- (talk page|useful stuff) 14:07, July 25, 2011 (UTC)


 * Not that. Actually "Warriors" was created because of it's formula with Synchro Monster like "...Synchron" + "...(NT)" = "... Warrior". Warriors of Yusei was also used in the manga. About the difference some cards' archetype need two Jap text to see belong, others 1. Some you have to look their common effect(s) like in "Goblin", "Chaos", "King", "Monarch", etc series to be a member even if they have 'that' name in it.. Look at the "Roids" sho's signature cards but "Dark Jeroid" in it to related section; you can do the same with "Big Eye", "Musician King".--Wasn&#39;t (talk • contribs) 17:28, July 25, 2011 (UTC)


 * See the various conversations at this talk page. This is another reason I think we really need to implement the whole Family idea. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 16:37, July 25, 2011 (UTC)


 * Isn't "Family" suppose to be "..." with its subtypes like "Cyber", "Cyber Dragons", etc.--Wasn&#39;t (talk • contribs) 17:28, July 25, 2011 (UTC)


 * The idea behind family was to recategorize archetypes that don't have support as families instead. An archetype is by default a family, but a family is not an archetype unless it has at least one support card. So "Elemental HERO" would be a family and an archetype. "Monarch" would just be family. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 18:05, July 25, 2011 (UTC)


 * To further complicate matters, I was advocating "groups", first in place of and later alongside "families". =D 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · ☎ Dinoguy1000 18:12, July 25, 2011 (UTC)


 * What's stopping us? The discussion that led to the idea was inconclusive, as I recall, with no real reasons not to, but also not much apparent interest in actually following through, so I say just start employing the idea and see if anyone complains. 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · ☎ Dinoguy1000 17:58, July 25, 2011 (UTC)

This really isn't much different from the question of whether Random Monster X is related to Random Archetype Y simply because it appeared in the artwork of Random Unrelated Card Z alongside Random Monster Q From Random Archetype Y - if there are no support cards asking for a particular string in a card's name as a basis for an archetype, then common sense should rule the day when deciding whether a given card could in fact be considered a part of the archetype. If the "Warriors" archetype, for instance, is really meant to be an unsupported group of cards used by Yusei Fudo which all have the word "Warrior" in their name (or rather, one particular katakana rendering of the word in their Japanese name), then there is no defensible rationale for running around and listing every card with that katakana in its name as being part of the archetype. On the other hand, we have the "Cat" archetype, which does have support cards that ask for a particular string in the card's name, so running around adding every card with said string to that archetype is much more defensible. 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · ☎ Dinoguy1000 17:58, July 25, 2011 (UTC)


 * your a fast typer; how do you type that fast or does the bot type for you. "Photons" also don't have its support cards, but are listed. Once the archetype is created anything related to it can be added look at the "HERO" archetype. It's a major headache adding all "...HERO..." there, but people do it looks like they gave up on it; i usually add the ones that aren't very complicated and easy to handle like "Knights", "Warriors"' sub-types, etc. What are the Big Letter's you wrote mean? --Wasn&#39;t (talk • contribs) 18:16, July 25, 2011 (UTC)


 * I'm just a fast typer. ;) The "HERO" archetype has support cards (not nearly as many as its subarchetypes, to be sure, but they're still there), as does the "Knight" archetype (one support card is still support), meaning that adding all and sundry to them is justified, as I said above (regardless of whether people are still working on doing so). "Photon" and "Warrior", on the other hand, don't have any such support and so shouldn't have every card with the necessary text in its name added to them - whether a given card fits the group's theme (e.g. for Warriors, the theme seems to be "mostly Warrior-Type monsters used by Yusei Fudo") should be the deciding factor for inclusion.
 * The "Big Letters" I wrote (which I'm assuming refer to "Random Monster X", etc.) just signify that you could plug in any random monsters and archetype and end up with a suitable example. For example, one major instance of this presented in the forum thread that discussed it was whether "Ojama Yellow" ("Random Card X") was related to the "Mokey Mokey" archetype ("Random Archetype Y") simply because it appeared in the artwork of "The League of Uniform Nomenclature" ("Random Unrelated Card Z") alongside "Mokey Mokey" ("Random Card Q From Random Archetype Y"). 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · ☎ Dinoguy1000 19:01, July 25, 2011 (UTC)


 * But not all the "HERO" cards are in that archetype they're lots missing.--Wasn&#39;t (talk • contribs) 19:15, July 25, 2011 (UTC)


 * Yes, but that has nothing to do with what we're discussing here. ;) 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · ☎ Dinoguy1000 19:36, July 25, 2011 (UTC)


 * @Cheesedude: I should have seen that coming
 * For "Roids"; Dark Jeroid/etc should be in the archetype, not in related. Expressroid only cares about "Roid", not machine-type "Roid".
 * For "HERO"; Vision HERO Adoration (per WC11 lore as well as jp lore), asks for "ＨＥＲＯ" cards. So anything with that word in the name can be grouped
 * "Photons" are like "Warriors", are held together only by a character, not their name.
 * There's going to be another 30 Monarchs and 120 Kings if this continues.....
 * On another note; I'm considering removing the part about Numbers being the largest archetype (at Numbers) because, currently, Speed Spells is the largest 'archetype' when we list them all (148). But it should be a Card Type instead, not an archetype. -Falzar FZ- (talk page|useful stuff) 01:38, July 26, 2011 (UTC)


 * Agree on the "Roids" thing; if an archetype's support cards just call for a particular string in card names (keeping in mind that this usually works according to Japanese rather than English names) for them to be eligible for support, then *all* cards with that string in their name are members of that archetype, regardless of whether they fit the archetype's theme or not (I touched on this above, but it never hurts to spell it out). The only times this isn't true are A) when card lores either state up-front or are errata'd to exclude such cards by name, B) if a ruling excluding such cards is made, or C) if the names of those cards are errata'd to no longer match the archetype.
 * If anyone wants to go through unsupported archetypes such as "Warriors", "Monarchs", "Kings", etc., and remove those cards that don't fit the theme, they've got my support. Such archetypes may, however, be a case for using the "archrelated" parameters, for cards that would technically meet the criteria set by support cards but that don't otherwise fit the theme (though please, don't run around doing this until it's been discussed and agreed on first)... Thoughts on this?
 * Does anyone seem opposed to promoting our treatment of "Speed Spell" to a game mechanic/card type? If not, it'd probably be better to just do so, rather than waiting around for further discussion that may well never materialize. What changes to CardTable2 would this require (I'm thinking we wouldn't need any new parameters or parameter values, since all Speed Spells seem to have the words "Speed Spell" in their name - is this correct)?
 * Last, not that this really matters, but Numbers are only the largest archetype if you count how many there are supposed to be, rather than how many we've actually seen so far. 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · ☎ Dinoguy1000 08:29, July 26, 2011 (UTC)


 * The problem with that is the archetype is currently at "Vehicroid", not "Roid".
 * I'd prefer not to do that until we somewhere else to put them. Can we agree on a name for what we currently have listed as archetypes that have no support. Family? Group? Series?
 * No one commented in the negative, only myself and Falzar (who created the topic) responded in positive. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 09:24, July 26, 2011 (UTC)


 * Then it should be split into 2 separate pages. Vehicroid Connection Zone asks for "Vehicroid", so this is like XX-Sabers and X-Sabers.
 * Yes, every Speed Spell has "Speed Spell" in its name.
 * There's one thing that I just noticed about it, cards like Acceleration Zone and Speed World say "Speed Spell" in " "s, which may imply an archetype. However, it says "Speed Spell" Cards with caps on C in Cards, just like the other Card Types. Whereas archetypes seem to all have lower case c for cards (e.g. "Crystal Beast" cards). -Falzar FZ- (talk page|useful stuff) 10:07, July 26, 2011 (UTC)

Someone needs to fix the "Roids" archetype; "Vehicroids" and "Roids" aren't the same. "Roids" aren't "Vehicroids" but that is "Roids".--Wasn&#39;t (talk • contribs) 12:08, July 26, 2011 (UTC)


 * The only two actual "Vehicroids" would be "Super Vehicroid - Stealth Union" and "Super Vehicroid Jumbo Drill". However, the "Roids" in the anime are called "Vehicroids" even if they don't have "Vehicroid" in their names, so that needs to be noted in the "Roids" article. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 18:29, July 26, 2011 (UTC)

The page Vehicroid uses (not something like  ), yet it manages to get Submarineroid, which uses |archetype1 = Roid ; that means it includes redirects to the page. However, wasn't redirects ignored after the SMW got 'updated' a while ago, which is why we had to use "Monster||Monsters"? -Falzar FZ- (talk page|useful stuff) 03:08, July 27, 2011 (UTC)


 * It did ignore redirects, for a while at least, but more recently seems to have started following them again. We still want to avoid them, though, so we don't have to worry about that any more. 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · ☎ Dinoguy1000 03:25, July 27, 2011 (UTC)

Naming
What should be call the "archetype that has no support but is no longer an archetype". Family was the first suggestion. I myself prefer "series". This fits in nicely with wording already employed on many archetype pages. If no one responds or or objects to the use of "series" I'm just going go to ahead and create the category and start its implementation in about a week or so. We also need to update CardTable2 to use "series" and "seriesrelated" parameters, right? Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 00:30, August 1, 2011 (UTC)


 * Just to rehash, suggested names are "family", "group", and now "series". I don't have any strong preference, though I'm personally leaning towards "group" or "family" myself. At any rate, terminology isn't nearly as important as allowing for the distinction in the first place. 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · ☎ Dinoguy1000 02:59, August 1, 2011 (UTC)