Talk:Ada Wong

https://twitter.com/MissTiffanyL/status/1070005780038868992?s=20

I know Twitter isn't the best source, but this image of Ada is the best current picture of her I could find. I feel like her image should be up-to-date, but it's not necessary. I just wanted to put out the option. Also, I can't find the official copy of that photo, so if anyone finds it feel free to replace the one I found! Meredithgp (talk) 06:55, 10 January 2020 (UTC)Meredithgp

{{Talk:Ada Wong/GA2}}

The section does a good job of discussing Ada's origins and how she was created for her role in Resident Evil 2, and what changes were made to her in the remake. However, the section makes zero references to her role in RE4; such as when during development she was added to the story, or a discussion of her role. Admittedly, such information might not exist or is difficult to find, but at the very least, her visual design should be brought up. Primarily because the section includes a few sentences discussing her design in the RE4 Remake, which comes off as a bit sudden without any references to the original RE4.

Also, would it be more appropriate to include the reference to her cut role from Village in this section, rather than the "In the Resident Evil series" one? PanagiotisZois (talk) 12:19, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

:Done. It is indeed hard to find any dev info for the character on old games like RE4. GreenishPickle! (🔔) 12:23, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

:Also, done adding some info about RE4, nothing else can be found. GreenishPickle! (🔔) 12:39, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

When referencing Jade King, the article as is refers to her with he/him pronouns—[https://twitter.com/konayma6?lang=en Jade's correct pronouns are she/they]. MelodyJettWerner (talk) 12:43, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

:{{done}} changing it. Greenish Pickle! (🔔) 12:47, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

Other articles for Resident Evil characters mention the models that their facial features were based on. The Resident Evil Wiki cites Ty Brenneman and Adriana as the face models for Resident Evil 6 and the remakes of Resident Evil 2 and 4, respectively. Would the following be considered reliable sources for this article?:

https://app.castingnetworks.com/talent/public-profile/45610128-9158-11ea-9bfa-0291f623b406

https://www.vjgamer.com.hk/articles/2019/02/20/50768 JokEobard (talk) 07:22, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

:doesn't look reliable. If you want further info, see WP:VG/RS. 🍕Boneless Pizza!🍕 (🔔) 07:35, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

== Source for a claim "Antihero" ==

Just in case this is needed [https://books.google.com.ph/books/about/Project_ing_Human_Representations_of_Dis.html?id=q727EAAAQBAJ&source=kp_book_description&redir_esc=y] [https://www.gamespot.com/reviews/resident-evil-4-separate-ways-dlc-review-where-does-she-get-those-wonderful-toys/1900-6418122/]. 🍕Boneless Pizza!🍕 (🔔) 11:25, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

:Possible TFA image to use when it is successful [https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:The_Resident_Evil_logo.svg]. 🍕Boneless Pizza!🍕 (🔔) 12:25, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

::Diff [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ada_Wong&diff=prev&oldid=1250782793] to be used in the future before the content removal. 🍕BP!🍕 (🔔) 02:08, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

:::@JokEobard Thank you for continuing to copy edit the article, which makes me want to nominate the article for FA, but finally its now a FA. Thanks a lot for help! Also, I also want to thank Aoba47, Crisco 1492 and PanagiotisZois since without them the article wouldn't be improved a lot. So, thanks a lot for them including HopalongCasualty for assisting me when the article was still shit and turned it into GA. Regards to all. 🍕BP!🍕 (🔔) 20:52, 19 October 2024 (UTC)

::::Congratulations on the promotion! You did a great job with the article. Aoba47 (talk) 23:31, 19 October 2024 (UTC)

::::Boneless_Pizza! Why, thank you. :) Congrats, you actually pulled it off. Let's all raise a glass. 💥Casualty ^{• Hop along. •} 04:04, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

::::Thanks and congratulations everyone! Special shout-out to @Boneless Pizza! for your tenacious efforts in improving this article. You rectified countless issues based on every single piece of feedback at lightning-fast speed! And your hard work paid off! If that isn't a cause to celebrate, then I don't know what is! :) JokEobard (talk) 06:15, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

:::::Thanks everyone. Actually, Crisco 1492 and PanagiotisZois were the one who helped us rephrase some of the complicated opinions in the book at reception section (the sexualization by Jennings, Hypermasculinity by Andrei and other minor stuff). I'm very thankful for that. I'm glad we made it out lol. Cheers to all. 🍕BP!🍕 (🔔) 06:23, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

• Congrats, BP and JokEobard! — Chris Woodrich (talk) 20:59, 19 October 2024 (UTC)

Most modern character FAs (ex. Chris Redfield, Jill Valentine, Lightning, etc) lead with character concept, then get into appearances. This article has it reversed. Any particular reason why? ♠PMC♠ (talk) 07:03, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

:It probably depends on the information because Ada has info like "Ada Wong is the pseudonym of a Chinese-American spy and mercenary who recurs as an antiheroine in Capcom's survival horror video game series Resident Evil. Her real name and background before working in espionage remain unknown" that doesn't fit at concept and design section since it's about her identity, not the concept. Additionally, it should be first/introduction in the body of the article because of that identity information. 🍕BP!🍕 (🔔) 07:07, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

::Well, no, because all of that could apply to those other FAs as well. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 07:13, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

:::@Premeditated Chaos At the end of the day, I guess it defends to the reviewers and to the author itself. During Ada's FAC, some of them wanted appearances to go first. Meanwhile, Jill Valentine's FAC has been sent 5 times and it seems like they wanted the concept to be the first one. 🍕BP!🍕 (🔔) 07:16, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

::::I don't see anything at the FAC about the article's organization. Can you point out where that was decided? And again, it's not just Jill's article, it's every modern character FAC. And in point of actual fact, it's laid out in WP:VGORDER, which is part of the MOS; all FAs must be MOS-compliant. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 07:31, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

:::::@Premeditated Chaos here Wikipedia:Peer review/Ada Wong/archive2. Panini! pointed it out that they actually prefer appeareances to be the first one. 🍕BP!🍕 (🔔) 07:42, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

::::::@Premeditated Chaos Also, check this revision here [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Video_games&diff=prev&oldid=1243152482]. It also talks about what layout do editors prefer at Ada and Mario (Almost all editors agreed that concept needs to go first when it comes to Ada). 🍕BP!🍕 (🔔) 07:45, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

:::::::No need to ping me please, I'm subscribed to the section. Mario isn't an FA, so not really applicable here, but in any case, one editor's personal preference doesn't override the MOS. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 08:07, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

::::::::Alright. Also, can you recheck the revision that I provided you above? Not only Panini agrees with it, but other editors also, including the FAC coordinator, Fuchs. There was discussion about Ada's FAC there. 🍕BP!🍕 (🔔) 08:10, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

:::::::::You linked the wrong diff I think, but I see the discussion. If the consensus has changed, then the MOS should be changed accordingly, and other FAs should be reorganized; it shouldn't be willy-nilly. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 08:11, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

::::::::::Yeah, I did linked the wrong diff, but you can see their discussion at that revision. But, I highly prefer concept and design first rather than appeareances. Maybe I'll reorganize Ada later I guess. But, I think you need start the discussion at WP:VG also first just to let them know. 🍕BP!🍕 (🔔) 08:13, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

:::::::::::The MOS in this state is a guideline, not a rigid rule: if it serves the reader better to get the appearances section first and then the development information fleshing that out, then that's the better route. In most cases, you'll lead with the creation process instead as it doesn't rely on understanding the character's role as much. Story heavy characters I've found tend to work better with the appearances section leading everything off so you're not explaining their role in the plot twice.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 16:50, 29 January 2025 (UTC)