Talk:Tales (video game series)

30 million franchise sales

I have not been able to find a reliable source that verifies this figure. If it can't be provided, we need to restore the last figure supported by reliable sources. Sergecross73 msg me 14:36, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

It's been 4 days since I wrote this, and almost a week since the change, and there's been no follow up, or better source presented, so I've restored the sourced 29 million figure instead. Per WP:V and WP:VNT, do not restore or add new figures without adding a source that verifies it. Sergecross73 msg me 16:28, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

Literally sent you Bandai Namco financial reports (or however you want to call it) which shows that the Tales series has reached 30.25 millions (Personal attack removed) 2A02:A03F:C84D:E01:4D99:4593:D7BC:9AE3 (talk) 21:22, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

Jist to be clear, it was not me. I'm not the same guy you argued with, I was reading your convos. 2A02:A03F:C84D:E01:4D99:4593:D7BC:9AE3 (talk) 21:23, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

Stop. You have done an exceedingly poor job at hiding your writing style and pretending to be someone else. This is your final warning for violating WP:NPA and your only warning to stop violating WP:SOCKPUPPET. Sergecross73 msg me 12:39, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

A different, equally unsourced sales figure has been added again. Another reminder that we need a reliable source that very directly and literally states the sales figure. We cannot violate WP:OR or WP:SYNTH. Final warning before the article is locked down from making changes, and you're forced to use the WP:EDITREQUEST system. Sergecross73 msg me 18:47, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

Mother......ship ?

I am uncertain whether I need to contact a moderator regarding this matter, but I believe the timetable should reflect the recent change in categorization. I believe the last editor wrongfully removed two games off the main series and is missing a few more according to the Aselia wiki, I have conducted research that confirms the franchise's classification has indeed been revised.

Although I am unsure of the exact number of sources required (I would assume 2-3), I have gathered some references for verification, all sourced from Japanese websites, as I was unable to find relevant information in English.

https://ga-m.com/n/tales-of-mothership-bunrui-original-crossover/ – This is a Japanese gaming news site that discusses the categorization of the Tales series.

https://blog.tales-ch.jp/?p=488 – This is an official Tales channel blog, which includes an interview with the creators explaining the revised categories. Please let me know if any additional information or sources are required. Thank you. Mistercrowser (talk) 18:20, 25 January 2025 (UTC)

We are not required to follow the same organization of the company or fan wikis. We don't even really use the mothership/escort terminology, it's just that they largely correlated to the common "mainline" and "spinoff" designations. Sergecross73 msg me 14:41, 26 January 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for taking the time to respond to my comment. I understand your point, but isn't Wikipedia intended to provide up-to-date information on specific topics. In this case, the terminology has evolved, with Mothership and Escort now being replaced by Original and Crossover, which are the new terms for the "mainline" and "spinoff" categories. I have also observed that some sections on this page have already referenced this change.

With that in mind, I would like to respectfully ask if it's ok for me to update the terminology accordingly or to let it as it is but add the missing mainline games to the timetable since there at least 6 main titles ignored from this article.

Thank you once again. Mistercrowser (talk) 15:57, 26 January 2025 (UTC)

No, that's not particularly one of Wikipedia's slogans or mottos. If it was, don't you think someone would have made thing change long ago? We are an encyclopedia, not a wing of the company's marketing team, or a fansite. We document things, but we don't need to align with subject or fan efforts. Case in point, this is a high traffic page, and their internal terminology/classification change occurred 5 years ago. This is not exactly breaking news; if this was a requirement, someone would have done this back in 2020/2021, especially considering the franchise was relatively active at that point. Sergecross73 msg me 16:30, 26 January 2025 (UTC)

I believe this change is significant enough to be considered "breaking news," as it fundamentally alters how games are cataloged. This is unrelated to fansites. As for the lack of updates, I don't think it reflects the issue's lack of importance, but rather the fact that the Western audience has largely been unaware of the change. It was initially revealed in a Japanese livestream, and it took and still is taking time for the broader community to catch up. On the Japanese side, including Wikipedia, the new system has been acknowledged for quite some time as evident by their Wikipedia page. Even now, many Western sources continue to rely on outdated and incorrect information, often showing screenshots of this page since most people, understandably, don't think to check fansites and usually go straight to the more popular choice, Wikipedia. I guarantee that most people coming here either don't edit this because they don't know the change happened, because they don't fully know which titles are mainline or not, or because they don't feel like it. Additionally, the article is painfully inconsistent, mentioning the change multiple times without fully reflecting it. It jumps between referring to certain games as spinoffs, then as main titles, and then back to spinoffs. Overall, the article feels disjointed, with a mix of both accurate and inaccurate sources that haven't been properly integrated. Mistercrowser (talk) 12:17, 27 January 2025 (UTC)

When I say its not "breaking news", I mean that, this is not a new development, but something they announced 5 years ago.

This is an important article, and it's got its Good Article designation. That means a lot of effort and review by experienced editors has happened here. It appears you're still learning how Wikipedia works and what Wikipedia is. You only have a handful of days/edits to your name. You're not ready to be doing a complete reworking of the article yet. I recommend taking some time to make small edits around the website, learning how it is, and then circling back to understand if/how this should be approached. Sergecross73 msg me 14:24, 27 January 2025 (UTC)