Talk:Battalion Wars (series)

Does this series really belong here?

Sure, the first game did have the name Advance Wars: Under Fire at one point, but the "Advance Wars" brand was dropped prior to release along with any direct connections to series (outside of Japan, anyways). And contrary to what the Battalion Wars (game) page suggests, the game did NOT originate from Famicom Wars. Kuju staff members have gone on record saying the game was never originally intended to have any connection to the Wars series during its design. It only got the name after Nintendo recognized some of the similarities and thought it might be more marketable with the name recognition. In the end it was ultimately determined that the game didn't have enough in common to justify the connection-- which is why it was abandoned in the West. The final game featured neither Orange Star, Blue Moon, any Lucky Charms-themed army nor any character from any of the Wars games what-so-ever. None of the games were marketed with Advance Wars connections either. The closest thing that connects the Western release to this series in its final form is the name "Wars", but going by that logic then the European release of StarFox 64 (Lylat Wars) would have to be included here too since it was also published by Nintendo with "Wars" in its title. "Wars" isn't distinguishing enough a word to be considered a branding by itself. Only the Japanese releases (Totsugeki!! Famicom Wars) have the connection, therefore it's my suggestion that this section be renamed "Totsugeki!! series" only mentioning its loose connection with the franchise, not portraying it as a part of it itself. --RandomDude 16:14, 9 August 2010 (BST)

That may be so, but your mentions of the Japanese name essentially answer the question: in Japan, it is considered part of the Nintendo, or more accurately Famicom Wars series, and therefore, in the rest of the world, the Battalion Wars series is accepted as a sub-series of Nintendo Wars, a 'spin-off' of those games, per se. Generally, in disputable cases such as this, the original Japanese release is considered canon (ie. fact), and the Japanese placement within the Nintendo Wars series has, as I mentioned, been accepted internationally as placing the Battalion Wars series as a sub-series of Nintendo Wars, a collective series of military strategy games, be they turn-based (Advance Wars) or real-time (Battalion Wars). Lylat Wars is a moot point, as that was only released under that name here in Europe for trademark reasons. Moydow 17:04, 9 August 2010 (BST)

Exactly, the original Japanese is cannon. However, in this particular case the Japanese release is not the original. Battalion Wars came out of the West and was originally written in English. The Japanese release was simply the localization. So, in this case the Western release is considered cannon for Battalion Wars. The "Famicom Wars" branding was just a marketing ploy by the publisher (Nintendo) for that particular region. As far its developers are concerned, it's not related to Advance Wars. The Japanese Advance Wars development team at Intelligent Systems had nothing to do with Battalion Wars. And the Western developers at Kuju had nothing to do with Advance Wars. The only thing they both have in common was the same publisher-- Nintendo, who because they owned the name rights to both chose to connect the series for a particular region. That doesn't make Battalion Wars part of the Advance Wars cannon. All it makes it is a side note in the overall series. The Battalion Wars series is not a sub-series of Advance Wars. Battalion Wars is its own series which deserves its own wiki, its characters shouldn't have pages here. There should only be one page dedicated to Battalion Wars and should be under the Japanese title (Totsugeki!! Famicom Wars). --RandomDude 14:04, 10 August 2010 (BST)

Rather than trying to make the perfect logical a argument, I'll just recommend you consider BW an adopted sister series of this wiki ;). Wars Wiki wouldn't be the first considering Zelda Wiki.org has Tingle content, and Mario Wiki has Donkey Kong, Wario, Yoshi, etc. WiKirby might someday get the info for the Lolo and Lala titles. If tomorrow we decide to start covering Starfy, for no other reason than "we wanted to"; we're still perfectly within our rights to do so. Axiomist 15:09, 11 August 2010 (BST)

That's a very valid argument. Do keep in mind though, I wasn't arguing that BW didn't deserve to be here at all, just in a diminished capacity. BW definitely has ties to AW and but it seems to be getting treated as full-blown installments of the series which it most definitely is not. Going with the point you made, if you wanted to add coverage of Starfy here you certainly have that right, but at the same time you'd also lose integrity as being dedicated to Wars. What if the Mario Wiki started cover Metroid info because of its connection with Super Smash Bros.? What if instead of just mentioning the limited association, it started having pages to dedicated to specific and obscure Metroid characters, location, enemies, trivia, and basically covered all articles the Metroid Wiki already covered, most of which doesn't relate back to SSB, let alone Mario. There certainly does come a point when starts to lose relevance to Mario. And frankly, it's already starting to feel like the Battalion Wars-coverage is heading that direction. If an article on a BW-related element doesn't connect back to the main series, it doesn't make much sense to be here. A lot of unrelated BW-related pages deserve to be deleted. That's all I'm saying. --RandomDude 20:46, 11 August 2010 (BST)

Heh, just saying, when Axiomist said that if they wanted to start covering Starfy information, he meant WiKirby, not Wars Wiki. XD Dany36 21:42, 11 August 2010 (BST)

That's a lot of "if"ing... Anyway, when I said "we and Starfy" I clearly meant WiKirby (my site). The unifying ideal is "Theme". Going back to other wikis, nearly every series has a spinoff title or two. AW and BW may be radically different from one another, but not so much as to seriously consider purging it from an up and coming wiki. If Wars Wiki was covering Starfy, then yeah, I'd be here saying "These articles just don't fit in." However, I don't think I can convince you to accept BW. You are entitled to hold to a more purist form of canon. Whereas this wiki benefits more from holding a more inclusive form of canon. Zelda Wiki.org has plenty of canon purists who despise the inclusion of the spinoff title Link's Crossbow Training, the CDi released games, and the Tingle pages. The aim was to appeal to the average fan overall, but the various factions of fandom have found their niches in wiki editing and more often than not, continue collaborating peacefully. Despite the prophecies of being seen as too general to be a relevant site, Zelda Wiki.org has been referred to in print twice, once for general information in a book, and once for Timeline specific information in the Official Nintendo Magazine (earlier this year). I'd like to think Wars Wiki will get something like that someday. Axiomist 22:07, 11 August 2010 (BST)

Just to clarify, the site's true name is "Wars Wiki". Our focus is the five sub-series of Nintendo Wars — Famicom, Super Famicom, Game Boy, Advance, and Battalion. The Main Page only redirects to "Advance Wars Wiki" in order to attract more visitors by search engine. We don't focus solely on the Advance Wars series. Any aspect of those five sub-series warrants a place here. The Battalion Wars games are a spin-off series, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't get attention. There are plenty of Pokémon games out there, and despite the fact that some are as different as an RPG and a pinball game, Bulbapedia covers the spin-off games alongside the core handheld games. — ^KC 06:27, 12 August 2010 (BST)