Armor Set Naming Convention
The naming policy of naming a set of non-storable armor after the name of the body piece is confusing and should be changed.
I believe a set of armor should be referred to by the name that the largest number of users would find easily recognizable.
A good example of the confusion the existing policy creates is seen when searching for information on zenith armor. Virtually all users in the game refer to this gear set as "zenith gear" and yet the average player won't find it on the gear set page because its listed under "Dalmatica Set".
This change in naming policy would also bring better consistency since the vast majority of storable armor is not referred to, by in-game NPCs, as the name of the body piece. For example, you don't see "Duelist's Armor" referred to as the "Duelist's Tabard Set". --Olorin 15:32, 24 May 2007 (CDT)
We have separate policies for that exact reason (consistency). Storable armor is referred to by NPCs, so we know what to call it. Non-storable armor is not, so the a question arises as to what to call the set. To prevent arguments over what "sounds best", it was decided to just name non-storable sets (with the exception of high quality non-storable sets that have storable NQ version) after the body piece to prevent arguments over each set. In the example of armor sets that may lead to confusion, such as the Zenith (Dalmatica) Set, a valid case could be made for a redirect to be made. --◄Chrisjander► t/ c 15:49, 24 May 2007 (CDT)
Fine... i will work on redirects for a couple of the most confusing examples... such as Zenith (Dalmatica) and Gods of Tulia (Kirins Osode) armor sets. Can you add your sentence above "In the example of armor sets that may lead to confusion, such as the Zenith (Dalmatica) Set, a valid case could be made for a redirect to be made.", to the Naming Conventions page? --Olorin 16:55, 24 May 2007 (CDT)
The naming policy has no bearing on what type of redirects can be made, it is assumed. Redirect policy is part of FFXIclopedia:Prohibited Articles, which is losely worded to allow for contingencies such as this. We can be reasonable for allowing redirects such as these when there is good cause, which this has (in my opinion). --◄Chrisjander► t/ c 17:04, 24 May 2007 (CDT)
I think the current naming convention is pretty clear though... except maybe in extreme cases where the body piece is named totally different from the rest of the set (Dalmatica might even be the only case of this). I think Kirin's Osode Set makes it more than clear enough that this is the god armor set. User:Sigma/Sig 17:09, 24 May 2007 (CDT)
Naming of other language titles
I was curious if the General Naming Conventions should also apply to items that have other language names that would fall under similar grammar. An example of this would be items such as Arete Del Sol and Bano Del Sol. Both of these titles are Spanish, and the word "del" means "of" in English. Per the naming conventions, the word "of" would be lower case, so shouldn't "del" apply the same means even though it is named in a different language? So the articles should be spelled out as Arete del Sol and Bano del Sol. --Wayka †Talk† 05:38, 30 May 2007 (CDT)
If Del is capitalized in the inventory, it must be capitalized here. --Talk 08:04, 30 May 2007 (CDT)
I'm going to agree with Charitwo on this one. However, if the "del" (which is "of the" btw) is not capitialized in the description, a case could be made for a redirect. --◄Chrisjander► t/ c 08:50, 30 May 2007 (CDT)
Key Item Naming
Since now Key Items are being expanded on the wiki, there probably needs to be some addition about naming of those. As far as capitalization, SE has them in the menu differently, for example, "Hydra Corps Insignia" is all capatialized, while "Holla gate crystal" have small letters. Then again on other items such as "Brand of the Galeserpent", they follow book title rules on how they list them. Should key items follow the same standards of capitalization as regular items?
Another issue is shortening. For example, I found the article of Ripped Floorplans, but the actual item as it appears in both the menu and on the description is "Piece of Ripped Floorplans". Should the articles be created as how they appear in the key items menu? I set the Ripped Floorplans article for move for discussion but need to await for a Naming Conventions rule to be set. --Wayka †Talk† 02:57, 9 June 2007 (CDT)
Per FFXIclopedia talk:Software Limitations#Ampersand, it should also be removed from this policy as well after the Wikia move is complete, as & is fully functional in use in article names on the MediaWiki version Wikia runs. --Talk 19:13, 7 September 2007 (CDT)