Talk:Ada Wong
Add topic| Ada Wong is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on January 21, 2025. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| This article is substantially duplicated in one or more external publications. Since these publication(s) copied Wikipedia, rather than the reverse, please do not flag this article as a copyright violation of the following source: |
Source for a claim "Antihero"
[edit]Just in case this is needed . 🍕Boneless Pizza!🍕 (🔔) 11:25, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
- Possible TFA image to use when it is successful . 🍕Boneless Pizza!🍕 (🔔) 12:25, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- Diff 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)
- @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)
- Diff to be used in the future before the content removal. 🍕BP!🍕 (🔔) 02:08, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Congrats, BP and JokEobard! — Chris Woodrich (talk) 20:59, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
Organization?
[edit]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 . 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- @Premeditated Chaos Also, check this revision here . 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)
- @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)
- 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 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)
- Well, no, because all of that could apply to those other FAs as well. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 07:13, 29 January 2025 (UTC)
Edit request for the "Other appearances" section
[edit]This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
This is a request to edit the "Other appearances" section of this page. As of the 24th of September 2025, the character Ada Wong appears in a collaboration between Capcom and the Chinese video games publisher Tencent Games as part of a special event in the video game Goddess of Victory: Nikke featuring Resident Evil characters. Source N2bGD (talk) 15:00, 24 September 2025 (UTC)
Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ({{textdiff}} is very useful for this)Slomo666 (talk) 16:09, 24 September 2025 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 23 January 2026
[edit]This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Viestursgode2010 (talk) 18:46, 23 January 2026 (UTC)
Not done: it's not clear what changes you want made. Please detail the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. - 🔥𝑰𝒍𝒍𝒖𝒔𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝑭𝒍𝒂𝒎𝒆 (𝒕𝒂𝒍𝒌)🔥 18:47, 23 January 2026 (UTC)
Add Remake photo
[edit]Or RE6 photo. This one is real old ~2026-20739-52 (talk) 18:09, 3 April 2026 (UTC)
- The Re4 image is too iconic for her as a character to be replaced. 🍕BP!🍕 (🔔) 23:18, 3 April 2026 (UTC)
- Wikipedia featured articles
- Featured articles that have appeared on the main page
- Featured articles that have appeared on the main page once
- Articles copy edited by the Guild of Copy Editors
- Old requests for peer review
- FA-Class video game articles
- Mid-importance video game articles
- FA-Class video game characters articles
- High-importance video game characters articles
- Video game characters task force articles
- Old requests for WikiProject Video Games peer review
- WikiProject Video games articles
- FA-Class horror articles
- Low-importance horror articles
- WikiProject Horror articles
- FA-Class fictional character articles
- WikiProject Fictional characters articles
- FA-Class film articles
- WikiProject Film articles
- FA-Class WikiProject Women articles
- All WikiProject Women-related pages
- WikiProject Women articles

