Talk:Dead or Alive (franchise)

Dead or Alive (franchise) was a Video games good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
July 13, 2006	Good article nominee	Not listed

Video games Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game articles

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks

AfDs

Merge discussions

Other discussions

No major discussions

Edit

--Ayanee I removed the mention of Dead or Alive on the Playstaion 3 because it is not a fact it was a long shot rumor with no backing what so ever from EGM. Their is no prof of it happening. In fact it contradict what Tomonobu Itagaki has said about the series saying that its Xbox Only.

Stuff

--Aeugnewtype 22:14, 12 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I took out some of the more non-neutral phrases in the article, since there's the advisory at the top and I kinda noticed that also. But the whole section of criticism/optimism is completely not neutral, but it is the point of that section, I don't know if things like that are left alone since it's sectioned off.

People... the seperate DOA pages contain more specific information about the series. I am for keeping the style it is now. Why only merge the series and not the characters too. There is simply not enough space for it all.

--S&T Kawaii Love 22:24, 9 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The optimism section is a little iffy, there's no particular reason for Wikipedia to hype up the game. -- Anetode 09:00, 15 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm for the merging; this article is comprehensive enough to speak for the whole of the series, and the article on DoA 2 is small.

--Bobquest3

This is a huge effort for someone not working in their native language and you deserve a lot of credit for coming back to it so much. However, I think you need to work on developing an NPOV style of writing. The spelling and grammar are easy for native speakers to tidy up but NPOV is harder to attain when one doesn't know the story as well as you do. Clearly, DOA fans can get emotive about their passion but you need to refrain from making allegations of things like bribery which are criminal acts. Any time I've deleted sentences, it's been when the meaning was unclear and looked like it might be hyperbole or unsubstantiated but there is still a lot of work to be done. Stick with it though and your writing will keep improving. Gest 13:39, 5 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Recent revert

I recently reverted from this edit to this edit. Since there were several small changes made, I'll just explain my revert. Its wikipedia policy to link most important and relevent words, certainly sometimes articles go overboard, but things like mythology, assassin, sniper, amnesia, etc should be linked. Also, in text use "and" instead of "&". Lastly, the other edits were either incorrect or removed clarity or information from the text. —siro χ o 15:53, Aug 21, 2004 (UTC)

This article should take into account the differences between the American, Japanese and European releases of DOA3. Significant gameplay revisions were made for each release, which raises the possibility of the initial release being rushed for the Xbox console's American launch (November 2001).

Edit 28/07/2005

Edited: The message boards of the spanish internet site which showed the first screens of DOA4 was elotrolado.net and not electrolado.net. In fact, there is no videogame site named www.electrolado.net.

this article doesn't seem that professional. it sounds like a fan's (and hence partisan) overview of the series.

redirected doa2 to main doa article

the doa3 article already redirects to the main doa article so I redirected doa2. the info on that page was about technical specs anyhow and was irrelevant.

Endings

I have played alot of DOA3 and Im thinking of adding information of most of the character's endings. Should I?

As long as they have a spoiler warning, then it will be OK. Also remember to make it from a NPOV. --Dynamo_ace 11:38, September 1, 2005 (UTC)

Critisism: Button Mashing

--Hakusa - Wiki addict: 03:44, September 3, 2005 (UTC)
A while ago I posted a critisism that I had heard some people talk about button mashing. They said that the game could easily be won by mashing a few buttons. I did some forum research and remembered a mention of this from an edition of Official Xbox Magazine. So, naturally not seeing this under criticisms I decided to post it, however my post was quickly erased. ThisWas my entry and you can just scroll down to criticisms you can see my entry. (It's the third.) I just wanted to know if I sould have written it differently or you guys just don't like the critisism.

I would like to mention this is not my opinion.

Every beat 'em up could be criticised as a button-masher. Also, some people posting on a forum is not really a could source for an encyclopedia. My suggestion would be to write a general piece at fighting game linking to button mashing. That article could do with a little work, too. violet/riga (t) 08:13, 3 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

--Hakusa - Wiki addict: 00:40, September 4, 2005 (UTC)
Thanks. Although DOA isn't a beat'em up, it's a fighting game. But thankyou.

Depends upon your use of the terminology! violet/riga (t) 10:09, 4 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I have dissolved the "recent developments" section. --Philip Laurence 18:02, September 4, 2005 (UTC)

Game pages

Should the DOA games have their own page? I'd say yes because it's starting to clutter the main DOA page and it would be much organized if the DOA games have their own page. --Snkcube 21:51, 8 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

it would be nice but before when they had their seperate pages they were edited so unprofessionally. --Philip Laurence 04:23, September 10, 2005 (UTC)

But I think if we work together a bit more on them, then it should turn out great. --Snkcube 9:40, September 10, 2005 (UTC)

to be honest though I do not feel that the articles should be split up. the article has been cleaned up nicely and is comprehensible. also I should note that I added the npov check. my note is in the page's history. --Philip Laurence 11:45, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

rewrite

The article needed some cleaning up. Some parts were ungrammatical, details were duplicated, sentences never ended, and so on. Anetode 11:22, 15 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Dead or Alive Ultimate now redirects to the main DOA article. The stub offered no extra info, save for the cvg infobox. Anetode 00:11, 16 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

merging character pages into this article

most character articles are nothing that this article already explains. the only real character article i've come across that I think should stay is helena's. should we merge the character articles into this page? --TBH 09:37, 27 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

There seems to be a precedent of fighting series characters getting their own page. Since, however, many of these really don't offer a lot of info, I think that they could be merged into a List of Dead or Alive characters (as per List of Soul Calibur characters or Tekken characters). The Character section in this dead or alive article could then simply offer a link to that index. Anetode 03:23, 29 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Splitting up articles

as per the notice on the page, I do not feel that the main article should be split up into seperate articles. the reason doa1,doa2 etc. are on the main doa page is because they never had anything relevant that wasn't already was on the main page. if we split them up they'll all turn into stubs anyway. --TBH 13:38, 1 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I have a question for you TBH why did you redirect some of the charscter articles to this page? -- Psi edit.

they've been fixed a long time ago. since nobody else has voted on the split tag should we just remove it? --Phil 23:15, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, if anyone's interested, I'll be glad to make seperate articles for each DOA game. In my humble opinion, I do believe that each DOA iliteration warrents its own article.-MegamanZero 7:35 1,December 2005 (UTC)

to be devil's advocate, I don't. Dead or Alive doesn't exactly have one of the best stories in video games. it hardly changes each game. --Phil 06:55, 2 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

That is a very true statement. The first DOA's story and character's motivations were hardly reasons to hold a tournament, the 2nd was even more ridiculous, the 3rd made no sense at all, and Beach Volleyball...well...nough' said. Still, the articles could be enough to warrnt a page in thier own right for gameplay and anylitical reasons. -MegamanZero 8:03 1,December 2005 (UTC)

If you can get lots of info on the games, then I'm fine with splitting up the articles. --Snkcube 04:56, 3 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

If you ask me, it will take WAY too much information to make it worth a split. And from what I can tell, every game has essentially been covered to its own extent, and any further information would require a good deal of speculation. If it is achievable, maybe one article, linked to via the main article, covering the storyline may be of interest. Other than that I dont see much use for it, certainly not a disambiguation page's worth.--Oni Ookami Alfador^Talk|@ 00:26, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Nor do I. But I think each of the games already listed here need to be wikified.-MegamanZero 05:48, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

In what way specifically?--Oni Ookami Alfador^Talk|@ 06:02, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

None of the games go into detail about the (cough) story and/or character rooster, etc.-MegamanZero 06:07, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

True. What do you think about this. Leave them on the main page, but include in either the infobox or body text (whichever is easier), A list of characters on DOA(original) and for every version do the same, but listing the changes only. And funny about the story. It actually does exist somewhat if you REALLY get into it. I mean, it didn't that much until DOA Ultimate came along, but with that, I get the feeling that there is A LOT more story injected into the game with that though. Its almost notable now. --Oni Ookami Alfador^Talk|@ 07:52, 17 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'd be glad to do it, but I'm working on overhalling the cast-of-thousands KOF character articles. So, I won't get to it until later.-MegamanZero|Talk 08:33, 17 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I can take care of it in the next couple of days. Just figured I'd run it by.--Oni Ookami Alfador^Talk|@ 08:52, 17 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I've finished the KOF charater articles for the time-being, and I'm going to go ahead and start making the DOA character articles. -MegamanZero|Talk 21:46, 18 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Dont we already have all the character articles? -- Psi edit

Oops, typo. I meant I was going to start making seperate DOA game artocles, which I have done. DOA4 is not out yet, so we can't give a proper analysis as of yet; I'll construct an article on it when it's released. -MegamanZero|Talk 06:43, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Clean up

It took me awhile, but I finally got around to overhauling all of the DOA character pages, as well as creating new ones. If possible, take a look at the character pages and tell me what you think of my efforts.-MegamanZero 11:24 25, November 2005

I think you did a very fine job. You added lots of new info about the characters, which is nice. You also re-arranged some of the articles and made it flow better. --Snkcube 23:48, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much! Now, I'm gonna split up the tekken articles into respective pages and overhall those character pages too.-MegamanZero 23:15 28, November 2005

Release dates

I am informally requesting that everyone cease removing the word tentative from the release date until the game is actually being sold. Every announced release date, no matter what game or how official the announcement, of ANY videogame, should be considered tentative. Release dates switch so much it is ignorant to call them anything but tentative until the game is released.--Oni Ookami Alfador^Talk|@ 22:09, 21 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Template

I have created a new template for all DOA related articles. please include this code: {{Template:DOA}} at the bottom of each article. --Phil 18:07, 24 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Just a quick question. Where are templates formed? -- Psi edit 18:08, 24 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

just like a regular article, except the article begins with Template: --Phil 18:09, 24 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Character article titles

I think we can rename some DOA character's articles. like Lei Fang (DOA) to Lei Fang, Bass Armstrong (DOA) to Bass Armstrong or Bayman (DOA) to Bayman. there aren't going to be other people with these names for a long time, if ever. if there are in the future, we can simply reuse their "(doa)" articles. --Phil 01:08, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I agree lets do that. I was a little annoyed to find that my ALPHA-152 had been moved to ALPHA-152 (DOA). How do we move pages besides copying info? -- Psi edit 01:15, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I moved lei fang, tina, bass, gen fu and bayman. but I had trouble moving alpha-152 and jann lee. there seems to be a problem with moving those. --Phil 07:32, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

An ALPHA-152 page already exists but it redirects here. How do get rid of that page so we can simply rename ALPHA-152 (DOA)? -- Psi edit 16:54, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You probably have to go through AFD, or if you can express your intent directly to an admin, a speedy delete. Don't forget to fix all the links when you do it.--Oni Ookami Alfador^Talk|@ 07:53, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps i'm being a bit anal, but do we need the character articles to have such long titles? (Zack (Dead or Alive character), Leon (Dead or Alive character) etc). Can't (DOA) or (Dead or Alive) suffice? --Philo 08:01, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Npov issuses removed

Neutral point of view (NPOV). Write from a neutral point of view. This is a non-negotiable and fundamental principle of Wikipedia, which allows us to make a fair representation of the world around us.

Criticism should be left for message boards not for information articles. "Just the facts please."

Quite. I missed that. I'll remove it immediately, if it hasn't been already. -Zero^Talk 07:32, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Allow me to point out one thing. Listing professional criticism (such as that by critics or reviewers in magazines) or otherwise published criticisms are usually acceptable. Naturally, this is under the condition that it is noted where the criticism came from, and that it be accompanied with examples of praise from critics.--Oni Ookami Alfador^Talk|@ 01:58, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Adding Muramusa and (perhaps) Rachel to misc. character section

I'm not sure about Rachel, but is it possible we could add an article on Muramusa into the misc. character section. He is in Dead or Alive 4, and we could also mention his significance in Ninja Gaiden as well. As for Rachel, perhaps not, but Ninja Gaiden doesn't have a series like Dead or Alive. What do you guys think? Seriphyn 16:56, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Non-notable characters. Place them in the List of Dead or Alive characters. -Zero^Talk 16:58, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Npov issuses removed again Please read if you are editing this page

Npov issuses removed Neutral point of view (NPOV). Write from a neutral point of view. This is a non-negotiable and fundamental principle of Wikipedia, which allows us to make a fair representation of the world around us.

Criticism should be left for message boards not for information articles. "Just the facts please."

Quite. I missed that. I'll remove it immediately, if it hasn't been already. -ZeroTalk 07:32, 24 March 2006 (UTC) Allow me to point out one thing. Listing professional criticism (such as that by critics or reviewers in magazines) or otherwise published criticisms are usually acceptable. Naturally, this is under the condition that it is noted where the criticism came from, and that it be accompanied with examples of praise from critics.--Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 01:58, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

So unless you can post professional criticism and praise from verifiable sources please leave it in your head. You got beef with the moves or think it's gods gift to video games feel free to tell people on your own website or on real message boards. This is a factual medium. Please keep it that way.

Npov issuse addressed again

This is a factual medium. No opinions please. If you are out editing pages please read the discussion pages to understand why pages were altered before you start crying vandalism. If everyone understands then wikipedia doesn't have to get involved. Thanks.--Panzer k 17:26, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Games section

I've taken a look at various other series that have been elevated to GA status and notice that the games section implements brief overviews of each game in the series' main article rather than the articles themselves. I'd suggest a merge of the various overview sections into the main article. -Zero^Talk 09:06, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Meh, I've lost patience with this. I'll just make a brief summary in my own words for each and leave a full link to every article. Since Chronos and Xtreme 2 are still stubs, I'll go ahead in merge them into this one. -Zero^Talk 09:17, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Done. A vast improvement. -Zero^Talk 11:39, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Notes

You need fair use rationales
You need to have refs like this -

.<ref>

Not

. <ref>

Keep up the good work, H ig hway ^{Rainbow Sneakers} 11:00, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, fair use rationales! Sorry, I goofed. I'll take care of that right now. -Zero^Talk 11:08, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Done. -Zero^Talk 21:17, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

GA failed

Mainly because the article in not as indepth as i feel it could be, the Inspiration and development section for instance, im sure if futher re-searched this could be expanded. Some good work has gone into this so far, but still renom again when it has been futher expanded. Childzy ^{(Talk|Contribs)} 17:45, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dead or Alive 5 platform speculation

I think it should be noted DOA5's platform has yet to announced, we all pretty much know it has high possibility of ending up on the Xbox 360. However, we don't know if this might end up multiplat. Wikipedia has no room for speculation, so I'm changing the platform for DOA5 in the table under Games to TBA. 12.205.224.183 (talk) 07:22, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Doa4cover.jpg

The image Image:Doa4cover.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --01:56, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

DOA 5's fate

While it is most likely true, stating that plans for any more games have been cancelled is more or less an assumption. Until a news article reports that the owner of the IP rights (Tecmo) scraps plans for the series, we can only really say that Itagaki will not be participating in its production. It seems weird but just because he says its cancelled doesn't mean it actually is, more than once companies have run withan IP after the original creator gave up on it, with varying results.--Oni Ookami Alfador^Talk|@ 18:48, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gameplay section POV

The section called Gameplay is definitely POV. It sounds like a review rather than an encyclopedic description. Most of it is purely opinion. Either delete it outright or replace it with sourced statements from neutral third parties. Could it ever become more than opinion? Wood Thrush (talk) 00:48, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bot report : Found duplicate references !

In the last revision I edited, I found duplicate named references, i.e. references sharing the same name, but not having the same content. Please check them, as I am not able to fix them automatically :)

"rep" :
- {{cite web | author = IGN staff| url = http://psx.ign.com/articles/122/122306p1.html | title = Dead or Alive news and update | publisher = IGN | year = 1998}}
- {{cite web | author = | url = http://www.gameinformer.com | title = Catching up with Tecmo's Prince of Darkness: Classic GI interviews Tomonogu Itagaki | publisher = Game Informer magazine Issue December 2004 | year = 2004}}

DumZiBoT (talk) 20:00, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nicole-458

The other redirects include Nicole (DOA) and Nicole (Dead or Alive character)

65.94.252.195 (talk) 10:23, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Per discussion on my talk page, I have restored the article and placed merge template for the proper target. 65.94.252.195 (talk) 11:47, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Could someone provide pictures for Ayane's and Kasumi's articles?

--Asperchu (talk) 23:29, 14 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Dead or Alive (series). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:54, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Dead or Alive (series). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.deadoralive.jp/doax2/index2.html
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090226220205/http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3168056 to http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3168056
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.metacritic.com/game/playstation/dead-or-alive
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.metacritic.com/game/xbox/dead-or-alive-3
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.metacritic.com/game/xbox-360/dead-or-alive-4
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.metacritic.com/game/xbox-360/dead-or-alive-5
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.metacritic.com/game/playstation-3/dead-or-alive-5

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:37, 7 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Dead or Alive (series). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:25, 15 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 14 March 2018

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved, per consensus. —usernamekiran(talk) 08:58, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Dead or Alive (series) → Dead or Alive (franchise) – This topic qualifies as a franchise under WP:NCVG#Media franchise, having a film (DOA: Dead or Alive) based upon the video games. The disambiguator is unclear in principle, but especially so in this case specifically because there is an unrelated film series starting with Dead or Alive (film). -- Netoholic @ 08:17, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support but Dead of Alive (video game series) or Dead or Alive (video game franchise) would be better due to the film series with Dead or Alive 2: Birds in 2000 and Dead or Alive: Final in 2002. In ictu oculi (talk) 08:53, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support Without any changes. Not seeing the movies as a franchise, and they have no series page either._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 18:57, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.