Talk:Ace Attorney Wiki

This talk page is currently being used as the main page for discussing improvements on the wiki in general as well as the main page. If and when this page grows, it may have to be archived and general wiki discussions done on the forums.

Hey, guys!
So I noticed that there was no talk page on the main page, so here it is. I just thought that a few of the more nitpicky subjects like spoiler policies, how to get more users in, how to interpret certain weird plot inconsistencies, etc. could be discussed here. This page could also be a place to bring specific issues up like orphaned pages and such.

I think that right now some of the biggest issues include orphaned pages like State VS Enigmar (perhaps it should be merged into Turnabout Succession? The case is actually playable, unlike the DL-6 Incident and the SL-9 Incident) as well as how to handle spoiler material and what to do with the age contradictions. -capefeather 18:03, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Contributors
I'll try and add a few more case summaries this week, possibly for the longer cases but I've noticed that there seems to be a severe lack of contributors in general, besides those who perform the minor edits. Is there any particular reason for this? Surely there must be a lot of Ace Attorney fans out there? ;/ -Premonition 14:52, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Two words: Court Records. But seriously, I don't think I could invest the time to make a complete episode page practically from scratch, myself. -capefeather 23:43, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
 * While I admire and respect Court Records it's by no means a comprehensive wiki as this has the potential to be. I do agree that taking the effort to write episode summaries from scratch can be quite time consuming, although I strangely enjoy the satisfaction when it's completed lol. -Premonition 05:37, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
 * That may be, but the sheer popularity of the site probably draws people away from other fan projects like this wiki. It looks like Wikipedia and GameFAQs/GameSpot are the only sites that even link to this place. -capefeather 17:50, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Main Page design
I did a little redesign of the Main Page yesterday, but I'm kind of at a loss as to where to go with this. I basically moved most of the "important" information from the upper-left box to the top to make it more prominent (as text already existed at the top). I felt that it was kind of redundant to put "Ace Attorney Wiki" in two places on the Main Page. But now I'm still uneasy about it... I wonder whether Template:Current events should be squeezed into a third column (like the Final Fantasy Wiki, or whether I should just leave it where it is (like the StarCraft Wiki. Maybe I should put in more pictures/buttons or something. I'm just not sure. capefeather 00:03, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
 * The new look is good, though I'm afraid the brown color isn't my style haha. The Template:Current events looks fine the way it is in my view but some more pictures would always be welcome I guess. Not quite sure what you mean by buttons though. I do have a question actually; how often does the random quote on the main page change? -Premonition 12:23, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I was going for a courtroom-style look :( I guess I was influenced by the colours of the benches and the buttons that appear in the games. The skin also had yellow, the other prominent colour in the courtroom. It seemed appropriate. The default skin selection is pretty limited, and I barely know any CSS, so yeah. Do you have a suggestion for a better skin? As for the random quote thing, I'm not really sure myself. Maybe it picks one every time you bypass your cache. capefeather 21:49, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I guess Sapphire would be good for representing Wright &amp; Co. Law Offices, as his books are all blue. Or Jade might represent Charley. I guess I could go back to Sapphire for now. capefeather 22:02, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I like the sapphire skin to be honest, it looks more clean and easy on the eye. The brown color looked kinda.....unpleasant? That's only my own opinion though, I'm quite sure there's probably others who liked it. Although I do understand the color choice now that you mentioned the courtroom style look. - Premonition 13:22, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Sprites?
I noticed that some of the character pages don't have their sprites :\ I think the sprites should be on there. I mean, sure, we'ed ether have to get them off somewhere like Court-Records or something, or rip them ourselves, but the Articles do look a little bare without them. It seems a little stupid not to have them. Takoto 14:09, 27 November 2008 (UTC)


 * We usually try and get offical art/good fan art for the character page. If we can't find that we use the sprites Ruan 9:48 27 Novemer 2008 (GMT)


 * I know that, but still, the articles should contain their sprites. This is a Wiki, and Wiki's normally try to get every piece of information about a certain subject. Leaving out the sprites when you could easily get them is stupid. You could just make a small section of the bottom and put their sprites there. Look at the Pokémon Wiki, Bulbapedia, they use the official artwork, and also have the sprites. Takoto 18:35, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
 * If you mean Cody Hackins and Joe Darke (I don't think I've missed any others), I just never got around to it. Sorry :( Yeah. Basically, it seems like the Gyakuten Kenji official art takes priority, followed by original official art and sprites, or sprites could replace official art if it's in a magazine with other weird drawings and stuff and isn't really fit to be the main portrait. At least, that's what I think was the case before I got here. capefeather 23:08, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Also, if you mean character pages with OAs but no sprites, I suppose we ought to put them in, but most of the character articles aren't complete in the first place, which kind of limits good places to put the sprite images. capefeather 23:10, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Look, what I mean is keep the Official Artwork, but make something at the bottom or something for the sprites to go in. Like I said earlier, "This is a Wiki, and Wiki's normally try to get every piece of information about a certain subject. Leaving out the sprites when you could easily get them is stupid". Does anyone here even understand what I'm suggesting. Takoto 23:38, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Are you suggesting we obtain/ rip off the sprite sheets from Court Records or something? If so, I believe there are more important things to get done first. Like I dunno, actually having full case summaries for every case? I don't see a necessary reason to include spritesheets/links to sprite sheets as a priority as they're easily obtained, as you say from Court Records. But by all means, if you feel they are vastly important, do feel free to add/link to them someplace on the respective pages. This is a wiki so don't be afraid to use your initiative! - Premonition 23:55, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I also ask that you ask things more politely, as I've already answered your question. Sure, the point of this wiki is to be a comprehensive source of AA info, but right now, we're NOT a comprehensive source of AA info in the slightest, so our priorities are not on pics that much. By all means, put sprites in wherever you deem them likely (you can use to make a gallery), but I don't think that's nearly the most important thing right now. capefeather 02:31, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Ugggggh. Sorry. I really didn't mean to snap, recently i've been having... er, personality issues recently. *cough*Bipoler*cough* Takoto 16:55, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Now that character pages are in a much better state than they were in 2008, I was thinking that the idea of a sprite gallery for characters is now much more reasonable. However, I was wondering if people had any thoughts on how to go about this. Would just a "Sprite gallery" section on the character page be suitable? Taking Phoenix Wright's page as a good example of a character page with plenty of sections, whereabouts on a page would be a good place to put it? Which sprites should go in it? Just the DS ones? Just the HD ones? Both? Taking Lana Skye as an example, if both sets were used on her page that would add up to 40 images. Would a separate page for the sprites be better? Does each character get their own page or are, say, PW: AA characters put on the same page? Thoughts? I'm thinking at the moment that it might be OK just to have a gallery at the very bottom of a page, above a page's references. But that's just me. - Strabo412 (talk) 18:42, July 27, 2012 (UTC)


 * Actually, I'll just go ahead and put what I have in mind on Lana Skye's page (a sprite of her in "unused images" had me thinking about sprite gallerys, in case you were wondering why her). - Strabo412 (talk) 18:53, July 27, 2012 (UTC)

Breakdown/Surprise
I had been browsing this site, and was curious, there is the Breakdown page, where it lists the breakdowns of different characters, and then it occurred to me, that the only characters who have Breakdowns are the suspects themselves, and the other characters have 'Surprise' moments, or Freakouts if you want to call it that, and are less severe than the Breakdowns, often just when the character gets shocked. Basically, who's in favor of creating a separate page for the shocks? Yes, I know that there are other pages in need of fixing, but this is just something that has been bugging me. --Idene 17:02, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

EDIT: OR, instead of creating a new page entirely, how about simply putting a second bullet of their shock moment? Any ideas or opinions are appreciated on this. --Idene 17:08, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Although Talk:Breakdown is probably the better place to have this conversation, I suppose a mention of it here would help. But I honestly don't know what to do with that article. When I look at it, I think of questions like: I've tried to raise the issue on the talk page and got no reply, so I don't know how successful this will be in getting people to talk about it. capefeather 20:49, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
 * What exactly is a breakdown?
 * Is it too vague a term to keep an article about it?
 * (As you said) Should there be separate articles for other animation categories like "surprised", etc.?
 * Is the name "breakdown" even appropriate?
 * Would video footage of the breakdowns be better?

Fan-made stuff?
As per recent edits to the main page by a new editor, do people think that this wiki should document notable fan works? If so, how are we going to go about deciding what's "notable"? I'm not sure it would be appropriate to document every fan work under the sun. capefeather 16:31, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Well, aren't we more of an in-universe wiki, with some out-universe elements, but sticking to non-fan made stuff? (fanbooks of the series being exempt from this) I mean, they could just use the Gyakuten Wiki for such things. To be succinct, I'm against it. --Tutuboy95 16:37, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Including fanworks is a very slippery slope - it's not relevant if it's not endorsed by Capcom or similar. Best to avoid it altogether. - NPChilla1 17:06, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Well, as the 'new editor' in question, my opinion on this might seem kinda biased, but fanwork-related articles should stay, just as minor articles not given as much attention as the articles for official material. - Mr. PBJ


 * Actually, you're not the new editor in question. Some dude put "The fan creations" into the Main Page one day. To the point, though, I think that you could convince people better by explaining your argument and addressing the issues Tutuboy95, NPChilla1 and I have pointed out. capefeather 18:02, 30 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I am the said "New editor", and before I made The article I did not know that Gyakuten Wiki existed. Therefore I am now against the addition of fan creations. HOWEVER, I do believe Remnants of the Past should be noted in the wiki.

Ohh! Well, I saw the Fan Creations thing on the main page, and since I was using the editor at the time, I made the AAO article. I think Fan Creations should be added, but in a minor scale (such as websites, tools, etc.), but unlike Gyakuten Wiki, not make articles on the trials themselves. - PBJ 30 August 29, 15:04 (EST)

EDIT: See? Articles such as AAO, PWLib (if it is ever made), or other websites/engines should stay. But Articles such as the 'boot to the head' thing should not be allowed.


 * To those not doing so already, please sign your posts with " ~ ". We would still have to address how we're going to go about deciding what's "notable", because this could easily become a very slippery slope as NPChilla1 mentioned. capefeather 19:28, 30 August 2009 (UTC)


 * We could just do a brief overview, like all the case makers that are critically acclaimed/most popular (such as PWLib and AAO) but not give huge lists of trials. And I don't think such a thing needs to go on the front page. While it is duly noted, it hardly is as important as "Characters" and such. --Tutuboy95 13:51, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

No deletion! PLEASE! I do like the "Boot to the head" thing, but seriously! PLEASE DO NOT DELETE THE THING! ~Darkus


 * To be fair to the Boot to the Head article, it is the very top result when searching "Phoenix Wright" on YouTube. That could count as a "notable" fan work. capefeather 14:23, December 15, 2009 (UTC)

Since there's so little to say about each fan-work, would it be easier to make a single list of all these things to save space? Otherwise we could end up with a wiki mostly filled with slashfic and all sorts of nonsense. NPChilla1 22:16, January 6, 2010 (UTC)


 * Well, slashfics are a lot less prominent than a top result of a YouTube search... Also, if something were notable enough, I suspect that we'd be able to make an article long enough for it to exist by itself. capefeather 22:28, January 6, 2010 (UTC)

Hold on a second. Cannot we just use Logic for one moment? The Ace Attorney Wiki is meant for one thing, and that is studying the universe of Ace Attorney. No matter how popular, I do not see Boot to the Head as needed material, due to the fact that it has never officially appeared in any games. It may be popular, however it is NOT IMPORTANT. Hardly anything such as Characters, or Locations, correct?


 * The people on this wiki decide what the Ace Attorney Wiki is meant for, really. capefeather 00:35, February 17, 2010 (UTC)

Main Page sections
So I've rearranged the sections on the Main Page for search engine optimization purposes, but I'm not entirely sure on the placement of some things, in particular the random quote section.

I'm getting a bit suspicious of using the poll function for featuring articles. Apparently, the function is very simplistic and abusable, and people seem to keep voting for characters overwhelmingly over everything else. Additionally, I think I'm running out of articles to feature due to many articles needing serious attention, and at this point I'm afraid of featuring characters who appear in AAI.

I think I can admit at this point that I'm not very good at maintaining a general news page. Do people have suggestions for the news section, or does anyone want to help with maintaining the news section? capefeather 21:26, September 1, 2009 (UTC)


 * I like the way The Nintendo Wiki is set up. We could try and set it up in a similar way, and put the Random Quote at the top of the page, like it used to be.
 * As for the Featured Article, are there any other ways for it to be decided? Also, we could put up a "How you can help" or something of the like so some would be a little more inclined to expand articles.--Tutuboy95 23:20, September 7, 2009 (UTC)
 * I thought the to do list did just that. capefeather 00:21, September 17, 2009 (UTC)
 * Concerning the FA, I figured a nomination process like ones found in other wikis would be better, but it seems that's not going to be feasible considering the total lack of input. I guess a vote's fine. capefeather 00:54, September 20, 2009 (UTC)

Outside the games
So I guess the consensus is that a brief overview of fan works could/should be made? Right now I have a category:community consisting of category:Capcom and category:fandom, as well as a possible category:press events. The Main Page can be edited accordingly to actions people take on this.

Press events coverage is a bit varied in other wikis. I did some quick Google searches, and some wikis have only official press events hosted by the developer company (e.g. The StarCraft Wiki includes an article on BlizzCon and only BlizzCon), whereas others include press events held by others (e.g. The Nintendo Wiki includes the Tokyo Game Show despite Nintendo not usually even attending TGS). Still other wikis use a news namespace or something similar. I've felt for a while that this wiki also ought to have articles on press events, but maybe the Gaming Wiki's articles on e.g. TGS are sufficient? Captivate is a Capcom-run press event; perhaps it should have an article?

I don't know what exactly the relationship is between the developers and the Gyakuten Saiban Guidebooks, so I'm not sure how their existence impacts all of this or what category is right for them. capefeather 19:28, September 7, 2009 (UTC)


 * I don't know if this matters to anyone concerning this, but Tokyo Game Show articles on other Wikia are pretty mediocre at best... Additionally, there are NO Captivate articles. capefeather 19:33, September 7, 2009 (UTC)

Main Page and Evidence Items
Is it just me or is the main page a bit...(to use the technical term) wonky? The "Recently released titles" window thingie overlaps Gyakuten Saiban 5 and Gyakuten Kenji for me. Speaking of Gyakuten Kenji, why is that there? Ace Attorney Investigations already has a wee icon. I'm hesitant to modify the main page as I wasn't sure if anyone else has problems with it and I'm scared that if I start tampering with it, it might break into tiny pixel shards that could fly out of the screen and hurt someone...

I was also wondering if it would be worthwhile having a page listing the evidence items for each game, just for completion's sake. Obviously you wouldn't have an individual page for each object (except for the ones that already do). Would this be a worthwhile thing to try or is it pointless O.C.D.-ness? Strabo412 17:40, January 1, 2010 (UTC)


 * About the latter, I don't see why not. About the former, it looks fine to me, so it might be a resolution thing. Now that you mention it, though it does seem a bit redundant to have a "recently released titles" section. capefeather 18:40, January 1, 2010 (UTC)


 * Just realised that the Gyakuten Kenji "doubler" icon I was babbling about was in fact just some text about its release date and the "Wikia Gaming" icon. Whoops! :P Strabo412 16:16, January 3, 2010 (UTC)

Wiki Logo
The current wiki logo has rough edges and black lines just suddenly end, I know its because of the original AAI logo.

I have taken the initiative of creating one by modding the AAI logo similar to the current one but with a nicer finish though its still alittle rough.

http://i522.photobucket.com/albums/w343/KiasuKiasiMan/AAWikiLogo.png

This is my personal work. Please have a look and if its good enough use it to replace the current logo. You can also make suggestions for me to adjust the current one.KiasuKiasiMan 13:48, April 2, 2010 (UTC)


 * The logo was uploaded on 03:03, June 3, 2009. I figured that someone would notice and do something about the obvious flaws eventually. I know virtually nothing about fixing images like this, so that's why it was left like that. It's good to see that this has finally happened. capefeather 14:16, April 2, 2010 (UTC)


 * Objection! The classic style is better looking. 24.171.243.120 23:44, April 2, 2010 (UTC)


 * The image is basically the same except with the weird kinks gone. I mean, sure, the "WIKI" part is different, but I'm not entirely sure what you're complaining about. capefeather 00:58, April 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * The "Wiki" part uses a funny-looking font, it looks out of place. As you can notice, all of the game logos use formal-looking fonts, it's what people expect from AA. 24.171.243.120 01:08, April 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah, thats my fault, I didn't know what font to use for the Wiki part since its very hard to alter the word Wiki based on the current Investigations part. So I attempted to use a similar one. It would be great if someone could suggest a more suitable font for the Wiki part.KiasuKiasiMan 14:17, April 3, 2010 (UTC)


 * If nothing else, the logo itself looks so much better now in general. Nice work. Strabo412 16:12, April 3, 2010 (UTC)

Ghost Trick
Well, I've barely been following Ghost Trick: Phantom Detective at all, so I only just found out about this, which implies that there is significant crossover between GT:PD and Ace Attorney and perhaps GT even takes place in the AA universe. This considered, it seems very likely at this point that we'll have more Ghost Trick content here. I find it a bit unfortunate that this was never brought up in the ~month that it was around, but oh well. How should we go about reacting to future GT:PD news? capefeather 00:47, May 19, 2010 (UTC)


 * The only crossover I've seen has been a dog called Missile. How about if anything else is revealed that it goes in a section called something like "References in other media" on its respective page? At least until it is confirmed whether or not they take place in the same universe. Strabo412 13:29, May 19, 2010 (UTC)


 * I've just found it odd that several people have treated this (or maybe something else?) as confirmation that they're in the same universe. I'm getting Perfect Prosecutor vibes. capefeather 15:06, May 19, 2010 (UTC)


 * Well, let's be honest; people are odd. If nothing else I myself can't really see AA characters in the sort of art style GH characters are in... Strabo412 00:48, May 26, 2010 (UTC)

Manga stuff
This message comes in response to the creation of the (probably) poorly named stub article "Phoenix Wright Manga". Now, I'm not exactly an expert on the manga, so I've largely avoided it. However, I have believed for a long time that the wiki should eventually have significant encyclopedic content about the manga. I guess the main problem is that there are multiple manga around that (I think?) are authorized, so it would be worthwhile to establish canon issues and such. capefeather 15:34, July 26, 2010 (UTC)

Can't we...
Change the Featured Article to Lady von Whippenburg now? She's obviously going to win and it's almost the end of the month. -- Life Sentence  18:42, September 30, 2010 (UTC)


 * Something about making Phoenix Wright the first article to be featured for only one month doesn't sit right with me. Of course, the first couple of featured articles only lasted a week due to the lack of a schedule in place, but still. capefeather 02:45, October 1, 2010 (UTC)


 * My first impression is that nothing sits right with you, Mr. Feather. --LifeSentence 22:30, October 3, 2010 (UTC)

Honestly, you're not in much of a position to criticize me. You have yet to make any direct, meaningful contribution to this wiki. You have even deleted your talk page containing ways to do just that. What that tells me is that you do not intend to make any direct, meaningful contribution to this wiki in the future.

The featured article system is not some kind of popularity contest. A great article gets exposure for two months to set an example for similar articles. It's almost frightening that people don't understand this and keep picking character articles. capefeather 23:28, October 3, 2010 (UTC)

==Ow. ==

That stung.

Well, you got me, Mr. Feather. Every time I join a wiki, I always do things that make people seem to despise me. I guess it's just my characteristics. But in the end, I do help out a lot. Just you wait. Sorry about critizing you.

Okay, I got your point on the Featured Article system. The wiki I used to be on was hectic and uncoordinated. We had an Article of the week, but it turned out to be Article of whenever-the-admins-feel-like-it. So, point taken. I suppose I don't have a say in this, I am talking with an admin. That's like trying to chop down a tree with a butter knife. LifeSentence 20:34, October 4, 2010 (UTC)


 * OK, I apologize for the manner in which I responded. I've been responding to people rather coldly lately, just about everywhere I go on the internet. Still, the comment that you made on Oct. 3 was honestly rather rude and that's the main thing that I reacted to. A lot of times in general, contributors don't appreciate so-called "Wikiprincesses" who put random stuff into talk pages and don't actually contribute. So it's almost a slap in the face to see said users suddenly negatively criticizing the contributors who worked to make the wiki work. All that said, my constant fear in this wiki is coming off as an "overlord" who ends up making all the decisions. So I hear what people are saying and, if I to disagree with them, I try to do so politely, with a good explanation. I just want you to know that I considered your concern legit until that "nothing sits right with you" bit. capefeather 01:25, October 16, 2010 (UTC)

Professor Layton vs Phoenix Wright
Just thought I should mention the upcoming crossover for 3DS (this will be quite a big deal I imagine):

http://www.officialnintendomagazine.co.uk/article.php?id=20637

A new article should be created for this project, ja? NPChilla1 14:29, October 19, 2010 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I just found out from CR and came over here. Phoenix vs Layton oh god. Take that, MvC3. capefeather 14:39, October 19, 2010 (UTC)
 * Just need to let the world know that of the diehard Phoenix + Layton fans I know, nearly all of them hate the sound of this game. I disagree. Anyone annoyed by this lack of faith also, let me know. BritischeMarioFan 13:42 February 15, 2011 (UTC)
 * Just need to let the world know that of the diehard Phoenix + Layton fans I know, nearly all of them hate the sound of this game. I disagree. Anyone annoyed by this lack of faith also, let me know. BritischeMarioFan 13:42 February 15, 2011 (UTC)

Sitenotice
Can people see the sitenotice? It's supposed to show up at the top of every page. I used to be able to see it, but now I can't. capefeather 03:11, October 20, 2010 (UTC)


 * No sign of it for me. Maybe due to the new wiki layout?  Strabo412 17:06, October 20, 2010 (UTC)


 * Yeah, that was in the context of the Monaco skin. I don't think that this new skin is using the sitenotice anymore, so I put its contents into the Community Corner/Messages. capefeather 17:52, October 20, 2010 (UTC)

PL vs PW
I know it's miles away yet, but I was wondering whether we have plans about what to do about the Layton crossover game? Since it appears to be based in a separate universe from both game series, do we have any ideas about how we'll go about incorporating information about the games into existing Ace Attorney articles? Like Phoenix Wright and Maya Fey's pages for example? Strabo412 15:37, October 21, 2010 (UTC)


 * I think that this is going to lead to a sort of segregation between the canon universe and the crossover universe. In any case, the two options seem to be either making a new separate section in Phoenix's and Maya's pages for the crossover, or making new pages like "Phoenix Wright ([something appropriate])". I've seen a lot of wikis like Bulbapedia, the Final Fantasy Wiki, SmashWiki, the Marvel Wiki and the StarCraft Wiki make different pages for the same character for various reasons (like separating canon universes from alternates like Dissidia, Pokémon anime vs games, comics vs movies, etc.), but one similarity is simply the aesthetic advantages of having multiple articles rather than one article that looks like multiple articles. On the other hand, making separate canon articles may not even be necessary; it really depends on the nature of the crossover, I suppose. capefeather 16:23, October 21, 2010 (UTC)


 * I was thinking that those were really the only two options. I'm personally siding with making separate pages, but I suppose we'll cross that crossover bridge when we come to it...  Strabo412 16:53, October 21, 2010 (UTC)

Ladder/step-ladder page?
I think that we should consider making a page for the (step-)ladder gag. It's probably the most notable gag in the series, as well as maybe the only one to exist in all games (or maybe not... can't remember). It just seems silly to mention every instance of it in each case article, as it happened a short while ago. capefeather 02:49, February 13, 2011 (UTC)


 * I think it would make a very good page. I mean, there's when it started, it's recurrent, and an Ace Attorney own joke. Thinking about this, we could make a page for "Ace Attorney own jokes", but I can only recall the ladders/stepladders joke. By the way, Wright would be mad at Wikipedia. It redirects "stepladder" to the "ladder" page... Jessica Ilha 11:37, February 13, 2011 (UTC)

Polld and Logos.
I have seen in other wikias that there is alot of nice polls that we can add.

For example: the sprite of the week.( Do we actually has a sprite page??).favourite character(A poll that changes monthly and is about character). Best Editor. stuff like that you know...

SOooooooooooooooooooooooooo........I think that the polls here can improve.

And, the logo is kiiiiiinda small. I think we will do with a better or bgger logo.Ace Detective 11:56, February 13, 2011 (UTC)


 * Last I checked, the logo has to be a fixed size. I don't know if this was changed. capefeather 14:35, February 13, 2011 (UTC)

Character theme tracks
What's the correct way to write them? I've recently added a few character theme tracks and I noticed that some of them are written normally, with quotation marks (like "Trackname"), while others are put in italics (Trackname), no quotation marks. Jmcdunce 12:35, March 6, 2011 (UTC)


 * They used to be in italics, but I started to change them to quotes because apparently that's more proper for song titles. That's just Wikipedia convention, though. I think that technically the episode names should also be quoted, but at this point perhaps that should be left be. capefeather 13:54, March 6, 2011 (UTC)
 * Ok, I changed them to quotes now. Also, is there any way to make lots of small changes faster? It took quite some time. Jmcdunce 19:24, March 10, 2011 (UTC)

Ask Capcom
Wondering if anyone else has seen this (29:45 in the video). Any thoughts? I'm thinking (and hoping) that he's just joking, since he doesn't give a reason. But if it's true.......GGGGGRRRRRRRRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGGGGHHHHHHH!!!!!! Strabo412 13:30, April 5, 2011 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I saw it on CR yesterday. I guess AAI really didn't sell well enough outside of Japan. :| Too bad, I wanted to know the new characters' English names. I still hope they will reconsider it, or at least give an explanation. Someone said this isn't the first time Capcom did something like that in the Ace Attorney series (that GS2 wasn't originally supposed to get a translation either). Jmcdunce 15:55, April 5, 2011 (UTC)

Canon-vagueness and AA1 endings
After mucking about with April May's page a bit I remembered that, depending on your choices when you show her the affidavit, you either find out about White from her or from Grossberg. I've clumsily stuck in the makeshift "canon disclaimer" I used for Missile's page, so I guess that will do for now. However, I'm sure there are quite a few other bits in the games that are a bit wobbly in terms of canon. Keep in mind I'm not talking about optional wee conversation tit-bits like Gumshoe knowing what species Charley is or "bad endings" like the end of Farewell, My Turnabout. Rather I'm talking about stuff like the May thing above and Missile's optional-ness in Turnabout Goodbye.

I was also wondering about the numerous "bad endings" in AA1 that I think happen whenever you mess up an argument. I say think because I only screwed up once in the game and watched as Franziska was dragged away cursing Edgeworth. I mention this because we've made a note of the "bad endings" in the other games. Would such a thing be possible or would it just be a pain in the neck and/or would the number of them just end up making the case articles look like a bomb site? Strabo412 21:54, August 13, 2011 (UTC)


 * Concerning Missile, etc., I guess the issue is the way in which the games treat ambiguously canonical events that the writers don't intend to "clarify". My initial thought was to note optional events as "potential behaviour" in personality sections. This may not be appropriate, though, due to events like the Samurai Dog incident, which is a big part of Missile's representation in the first game. The clearest treatment of optionally canonical situations by the games that I can think of is in some of the responses to showing your badge; some people claim that Phoenix likes to show his badge (and Phoenix even tells Apollo that he used to like to show his badge), which only makes sense if the player's inclination is consistently to show the badge (or not). Maybe we should just note in the bio how to trigger the optional event, if it must be included to help the bio. Something similar could be done for branching events.


 * Concerning the "bad endings", maybe they could be compiled into an article about them, and AAI case articles could link to said article. I say this because the number of bad endings could cause bloating issues if placed into the case articles themselves. Sorry for the late reply on this; partially I was occupied with other things, and partially I was thinking of how to solve this.

capefeather 19:51, August 25, 2011 (UTC)


 * Well, I apologise for replying to your reply even later than you! I suppose my current method of dealing with the optional events would do for now unless someone comes up with something better. As for the AAI "bad endings", I guess a separate article could work. If I ever get round to replaying the game I'll make a note of them and assess thing from there... Strabo412 10:58, October 17, 2011 (UTC)

Our scope (Re: UMvC3 et al)
What should our scope be concerning games that aren't "part of the series" but nonetheless feature characters from the series? Offhand, I can think of Wii Love Golf, Ghost Trick, Layton-kyōju VS Gyakuten Saiban and, of course, Ultimate Marvel vs Capcom 3. Games like the former two contain mere allusions to elements of the series, so their mentions are limited to blurbs in character pages like the references in animes. However, in the latter two, Phoenix is a main playable character. This indicates to me that perhaps there should be pages about UMvC3. On the other hand, the Marvel vs Capcom Wiki already has UMvC3 covered, and PLvAA involves developers who were involved in the AA series. capefeather 15:20, October 15, 2011 (UTC)


 * For UMvC3, how about something similar to the way Bulbapedia deals with games like Super Smash Bros. Brawl by restricting the article to just things in the game that are about the AA series? Strabo412 10:58, October 17, 2011 (UTC)

After giving it a lot of thought, that's probably the best solution. I guess the difference between Layton vs and Marvel vs is that Phoenix is a defining element of the former but not of the latter. That logic seems kind of backwards typing it out, though. "Phoenix isn't that vital to the game, so we won't talk about the game that much." Oh, well. capefeather 00:36, November 7, 2011 (UTC)

Opening Statement
Upon examining the wiki's opening section to Turnabout Goodbyes, I believe, from a stylised viewpoint, that certain other cases may be enhanced by being given the same image. I'm referring to the use of quotes in proportion to the use of actual description, and I would like the suggest this style for some (not all) other cases, for example Turnabout Memories or The Lost Turnabout. If you dislike this idea, simply say, and we'll drop it, but I just think it would be more interesting to look at.Thehumangoomba 12:48, October 18, 2011 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure, but are you talking about using the quote template throughout an episode article? If so, while I do agree that it is slightly more visually interesting, I think that it should maybe be limited to the start of each section. Otherwise things tend to get a bit messy. Strabo412 13:04, October 19, 2011 (UTC)

I'm suggesting the introduction to certain cases, such as The Lost Turnabout's opening dream sequence; i.e;

(Insert spooky music title here) plays "???"

- huff... huff

"???"

- How... how did I get into this mess

"???"

- That's quite enough!

"???"

- You can't run forever... Mr. Phoenix Wright!!

And then we discuss the giant boss-eyed judge.

NB: Firstly, I'm not suggesting an entire section played out in this manner... I just think emphasising certain lines or situations may ensure people get the right idea as to what happens.

Secondly, forgive the lateness of my reply. Poxy computers. :[

Thirdly, I know this isn't the correct text from [The Lost Turnabout], but I haven't played it in Grossberg's years.

86.12.164.5 12:53, October 31, 2011 (UTC)


 * Ahh, I see. Well, I'm personally fine with that. I think most of the case articles are already like that already anyway. Strabo412 14:45, October 31, 2011 (UTC)

Zvarri! Just noticed the lack of signature. Sorry, and cheers. I'll see if any others have opinions for cases.Thehumangoomba 15:04, October 31, 2011 (UTC)

Featured article "Other" resolution
I knew this would happen eventually. Clearly, I'm not an infallible source of "featured article" nominations. I just wish people tried to participate more in this, especially when they vote "Other". For this situation, I've thought of two solutions:


 * feature Dee Vasquez since it got the most non-Other votes;
 * feature Troupe Gramarye, the runner-up from the last poll, which dominated all of the other options save the winner.

Thoughts? capefeather 00:41, November 7, 2011 (UTC)


 * I think either Dee Vasquez, ignore this one and try again, or try again with both Dee Vasquez and Troupe Gramarye in it. Strabo412 21:19, November 7, 2011 (UTC)

This is NOT the Monty Python Wiki
Am I missing the boat here, or is this advertisement that has just appeared on the main page part of the dreaded SPAM clique. Personally, I have become exasperated with the ridiculous dropping of hints and exertions that people like this website, or find this particular fanfiction more promising than the actual games for some bizarre reason. I am well aware that this is typical for many wikis that are tampered with uncouthly, but is there any possible way that we can verify the sources or justify new material? I'm just saying, I don't really desire thumbing through a wealth of 'evidence' that Phoenix is cute or people should try out irritatinggamesandspamfodderforsaps.com.

Thehumangoomba (talk) 13:11, November 22, 2012 (UTC)

New Character Template!
Hello everyone! I'm a new here and a newbie in the Ace Attorney's world. Hardly anyone knows me here. But I feel this wiki needs improvement, better templates. So here I am, introducing to you, this forum : New Character Template! Please take out your time and read it through and don't forget to vote!

Regards,  Phoenix   Wright or Wrong?  15:34, May 23, 2013 (UTC)


 * Welcome! Proactively helpful people are always welcome. Your template is an interesting idea. I've put in my two cents on the forum page. - Strabo412 (talk) 16:58, May 23, 2013 (UTC)

Layton crossover localisation confirmed!
Nintendo Direct video just confirmed that the game is coming to Europe and America early 2014. Plus the name has been tweaked: Professor Layton vs Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney. That's a LOT to change... NPChilla1 (talk) 14:45, August 7, 2013 (UTC)

Age on templates for guilty characters
So, for a while, I've noticed that many characters who have been found to be guilty of a crime in one way or another during an episode have the words "possibly deceased" next to their ages. I don't think I recall there ever being a mention of capital punishment anywhere in the series except for Joe Darke. Even if each and every one of the convicts in the series were sentenced to death, the chances of them actually being executed immediately are next to zero. My point being, is there a reason why the words "possibly deceased" are used sp regularly, especially when we've seen cases like Frank Sahwit where the character is still alive two to three years later? Schiffy (T &#124; C ) 23:17, September 26, 2013 (UTC)

It's mostly because characters are labeled as "deceased" in the first place. As seen in the age section itself, it's difficult to communicate to a drive-by editor what we precisely mean by even simple-sounding things like "age", and what constitutes a significant probability of being "deceased". I don't really like it, either, but I think it beats having to explain to people that characters aren't necessarily deceased just because the game world has capital punishment in it. As for the capital punishment itself, in The Stolen Turnabout, the judge mentions that capital crime results in capital punishment, and various other instances state that Phoenix has people's lives in his hands. A more accurate treatment of this would be to actually look at Japan's punishment procedures in the early 2000s, but I've never really had the time to conduct that kind of research. capefeather (talk) 13:31, September 27, 2013 (UTC)


 * I've been thinking about this. Maybe it would be better to change "(possibly deceased)" to "". Thoughts? - Strabo412 (talk) 18:29, December 13, 2013 (UTC)


 * Or, alternatively, put "Possibly executed" under the "Death" section of the character's template? - Strabo412 (talk) 18:34, December 13, 2013 (UTC)

I slightly prefer the first over the second and the way it is right now. Even better would be a solution to the edit wars that pop up from time to time. Maybe we should just go by the insinuations regardless of whether they're consistent with real Japanese law... I mean, we have Frank Sahwit who apparently is going to be let go eventually, even though he committed second-degree murder. I feel like the court system is a lot more flexible with punishments that can be doled out than in real-life North America, where mandatory minimum sentences can result in people being jailed for 10 years for a science experiment <.< capefeather (talk) 00:53, December 14, 2013 (UTC)


 * Capital punishment... I'm not going to even touch that topic. Anyhow, it is! - Strabo412 (talk) 21:23, December 14, 2013 (UTC)

New background and logo.
Do you think that considering the latest Ace Attorney game, should we change the wiki's logo and background to reflect some sort of a new era the series enters? Sligneris (talk) 13:08, September 29, 2013 (UTC)

ABOUT THE AGE AT REBUT DEBATE
I've been seeing the "edits wars" about the ages on here and...I have to say, I find the whole "putting possibly descesed by every true killer's age" thing kinda pointlessly confusing.

I have a number of reasons for this;

1) No-where in the series do they say that all true killers are executed. The only people that we know for sure where sent to death were Dahlia, Terry and Simon. With Dahila, she murdered two people, tried to kill her boyfriend and staged a fake kidnapping to steal a million dollar dimoand and was the spark for someone's suicide. She did enough more then just kill someone. Terry as well, allegdy kidnapped and killed a child, and commited extortion. With Simon they clearly say that the goverment thought he was the Phantom so they gave him a harsh ruling. Every instance of death penalties in the series is for people who did more then just murdered one person. The Judge says that murder is a captial crime but he doesn't say that it's always given the death penalty.

2) Some of them make no sense, and it's just stupid to have something that's 99% likely not to be true on a page, just due to some format that the wiki has. Culprits who committed justified self-defense, or killed to protect somone obviously wouldn't get the death penalty. It's ridicous to even try and argue otherwise, since they techianlly didn't even commit proper murder. No court system, not even the most batshit-insanely harsh ones, would send to death over something like that.

3) It's just plan wrong and confusing. The section says "Age at debute" not "WHAT HAPPENS TO THIS PERSON?!". It's their age when they first appear in game. There should AT LEAST be a seprerate section for this kinda stuff. Like a "current statues" section for Alive, dead, in jail ect. As it is now, it makes no sense.