Editing Forum:General proposals/Archive 5

From SmashWiki, the Super Smash Bros. wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
Warning You aren't logged in. While it's not a requirement to create an account, doing so makes it a lot easier to keep track of your edits and a lot harder to confuse you with someone else. If you edit without being logged in, your IP address will be recorded in the page's edit history.

The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then publish the changes below to finish undoing the edit.

Latest revision Your text
Line 1: Line 1:
{{archive}}
{{Forumheader|Proposals}}<!-- Please put your content under this line.  Be sure to sign your edits with four tildes ~~~~ -->
{{Archive box|4}}
[[Category:Proposals|*]]
<center><big><big>'''Welcome to the SmashWiki Proposals page.<br>If you wish to make a new proposal, please do so at the bottom of the page under a new section header.<br>Remember to sign your comments with '''<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki></big></big></center><br><br>
__NEWSECTIONLINK__
<!-- REMEMBER TO SIGN YOUR COMMENTS WITH ~~~~ -->
<!-- DO NOT EDIT ABOVE THIS LINE -->


==Former Mains for smasher pages==
==Former Mains for smasher pages==
Line 18: Line 24:
| [[File:SSB4_Icon.png|link=Super Smash Bros for Wii U|16px]]||{{Head|Corrin|g=SSB4|s=16px}}||{{Head|Sheik|g=SSB4|s=16px}}||{{Head|Diddy Kong|g=SSB4|s=16px}}
| [[File:SSB4_Icon.png|link=Super Smash Bros for Wii U|16px]]||{{Head|Corrin|g=SSB4|s=16px}}||{{Head|Sheik|g=SSB4|s=16px}}||{{Head|Diddy Kong|g=SSB4|s=16px}}
|-
|-
| [[File:SSBU_Icon.png|link=Super Smash Bros Ultimate|16px]]||{{Head|Inkling|g=SSBU|s=16px}}|| ||
| [[File:SSBU_Icon.png|link=Super Smash Bros Utimate|16px]]||{{Head|Inkling|g=SSBU|s=16px}}|| ||
|}  
|}  
[[User:Patzui|Patzui]] ([[User talk:Patzui|talk]]) 08:32, May 9, 2019 (EDT)
[[User:Patzui|Patzui]] ([[User talk:Patzui|talk]]) 08:32, May 9, 2019 (EDT)
Line 267: Line 273:
'''Dont Support''' While I am ok with changes only Pokemon or really any JRPG franchise should remain the same as right now because unlike other games these games don't have great animations in their origin game and Pokémon that came from Red and Green suffer the most from this proposal [[User:Thegameandwatch|Thegameandwatch]] ([[User talk:Thegameandwatch|talk]]) 17:50, June 26, 2020 (EDT)
'''Dont Support''' While I am ok with changes only Pokemon or really any JRPG franchise should remain the same as right now because unlike other games these games don't have great animations in their origin game and Pokémon that came from Red and Green suffer the most from this proposal [[User:Thegameandwatch|Thegameandwatch]] ([[User talk:Thegameandwatch|talk]]) 17:50, June 26, 2020 (EDT)
:Sorry for the late reply here, I don't use the wiki as frequently as I used to. Anyway...mmm, I don't feel inclined to agree here. Aesthetics aren't necessarily the name of the game here. The purpose of an origin section is to provide, well, the origin of a move. '''The issue that these sections have right now in serving that purpose is, long and far, the consistency factor.''' If there is to be new origin section policy, it must be uniform and precise. Specifically excluding Pokemon and RPGs from this, ''solely'' due to the subjective opinion that they look bad, is not good policy. Some individuals may think that the old aesthetic looks good, and that opinion is extremely popular among retro gamers. That alone already makes this idea shaky. We cannot go with opinion when enforcing this kind of policy, it just doesn't work. I hope my explanation was clear. --[[File:PlagueSigImage.png|20px]][[User:Plague von Karma|<span style="color: #e68;">'''Plague'''</span>]][[User talk:Plague von Karma|<span style="color: #e68;">''' von Karma'''</span>]][[File:PlagueSigImage.png|20px]] 12:53, June 28, 2020 (EDT)
:Sorry for the late reply here, I don't use the wiki as frequently as I used to. Anyway...mmm, I don't feel inclined to agree here. Aesthetics aren't necessarily the name of the game here. The purpose of an origin section is to provide, well, the origin of a move. '''The issue that these sections have right now in serving that purpose is, long and far, the consistency factor.''' If there is to be new origin section policy, it must be uniform and precise. Specifically excluding Pokemon and RPGs from this, ''solely'' due to the subjective opinion that they look bad, is not good policy. Some individuals may think that the old aesthetic looks good, and that opinion is extremely popular among retro gamers. That alone already makes this idea shaky. We cannot go with opinion when enforcing this kind of policy, it just doesn't work. I hope my explanation was clear. --[[File:PlagueSigImage.png|20px]][[User:Plague von Karma|<span style="color: #e68;">'''Plague'''</span>]][[User talk:Plague von Karma|<span style="color: #e68;">''' von Karma'''</span>]][[File:PlagueSigImage.png|20px]] 12:53, June 28, 2020 (EDT)
Bumping this. I really want to see this get put through. --[[File:PlagueSigImage.png|20px]][[User:Plague von Karma|<span style="color: #e68;">'''Plague'''</span>]][[User talk:Plague von Karma|<span style="color: #e68;">''' von Karma'''</span>]][[File:PlagueSigImage.png|20px]] 17:13, September 2, 2020 (EDT)


== Spirit type template ==
== Spirit type template ==
Line 280: Line 284:
--[[User:CanvasK|CanvasK]] ([[User talk:CanvasK|talk]]) 10:17, June 18, 2020 (EDT)
--[[User:CanvasK|CanvasK]] ([[User talk:CanvasK|talk]]) 10:17, June 18, 2020 (EDT)
:'''Support''' per proposal. [[Special:Contributions/46.229.158.109|46.229.158.109]] 11:01, June 18, 2020 (EDT)
:'''Support''' per proposal. [[Special:Contributions/46.229.158.109|46.229.158.109]] 11:01, June 18, 2020 (EDT)
:'''Support''', definitely would cut down on bytes, and would be more convenient. ''[[User:Alex the weeb|<span style="color: blue;">'''Alex'''</span>]] the [[User talk:Alex the weeb|<span style="color: red;">'''Weeb'''</span>]]'' 10:55, July 5, 2020 (EDT)
'''Support''', definitely would cut down on bytes, and would be more convenient. ''[[User:Alex the weeb|<span style="color: blue;">'''Alex'''</span>]] the [[User talk:Alex the weeb|<span style="color: red;">'''Weeb'''</span>]]'' 10:55, July 5, 2020 (EDT)
:'''Support''' per what Alex bought up, and the proposal. --[[File:PlagueSigImage.png|20px]][[User:Plague von Karma|<span style="color: #e68;">'''Plague'''</span>]][[User talk:Plague von Karma|<span style="color: #e68;">''' von Karma'''</span>]][[File:PlagueSigImage.png|20px]] 09:33, July 22, 2020 (EDT)
 
Bump, I guess. How much does it take for a general proposal to pass? If this is enough I'm willing to create and implement the template. --[[User:CanvasK|CanvasK]] ([[User talk:CanvasK|talk]]) 15:14, October 20, 2020 (EDT)


==Creating an article on the July 2020 sexual misconduct allegations==
==Creating an article on the July 2020 sexual misconduct allegations==
Line 300: Line 301:
As the name says, a category for players who are considered "Wi-Fi Warriors." A basic guideline for this can be the Wi-Fi Warrior Rank, which itself should have its own category as well. [[User:Cookies and Creme|<span style="font-family: Georgia;color: black;">Cookies</span>]][[File:CnC Signature.png|20px]][[User talk:Cookies and Creme|<span style="font-family: Georgia; color: black;">Creme</span>]] 13:32, July 7, 2020 (EDT)
As the name says, a category for players who are considered "Wi-Fi Warriors." A basic guideline for this can be the Wi-Fi Warrior Rank, which itself should have its own category as well. [[User:Cookies and Creme|<span style="font-family: Georgia;color: black;">Cookies</span>]][[File:CnC Signature.png|20px]][[User talk:Cookies and Creme|<span style="font-family: Georgia; color: black;">Creme</span>]] 13:32, July 7, 2020 (EDT)
:'''Support''' per nominator. [[Special:Contributions/217.149.243.2|217.149.243.2]] 15:31, July 12, 2020 (EDT)
:'''Support''' per nominator. [[Special:Contributions/217.149.243.2|217.149.243.2]] 15:31, July 12, 2020 (EDT)
:'''Support'''. The WiFi support the wiki has been doing recently would benefit a lot from this. It's basically the WiFi PGR. --[[File:PlagueSigImage.png|20px]][[User:Plague von Karma|<span style="color: #e68;">'''Plague'''</span>]][[User talk:Plague von Karma|<span style="color: #e68;">''' von Karma'''</span>]][[File:PlagueSigImage.png|20px]] 22:07, July 18, 2020 (EDT)
:'''Support'''. --[[User:Meester Tweester|Meester Tweester]] ([[User talk:Meester Tweester|talk]]) 19:39, July 22, 2020 (EDT)
:'''Support'''. Not much to add. [[User:SenorMexicano|<span style="color:#850FFA; text-shadow: 0px 0px 3px green">'''Señor'''</span> <span style="color:#850FFA;text-shadow:0px 0px 3px green">'''Mexicano'''</span>]] ''[[User talk:SenorMexicano|<span style="color:lightpurple;text-shadow:0px 0px 2px lightgreen">(talk)</span>]]'' 20:45, July 22, 2020 (EDT)
:'''Support.''' Seems like a no-brainer in the name of organization. [[User:Acgamer28|<span style="font-family:Courier;color:blue">'''Acgamer'''</span>]][[User talk:Acgamer28|<span style="font-family:Courier;color:red">'''28'''</span>]][[File:Acgamer28SignatureHead.png|20px]] 02:24, July 24, 2020 (EDT)
:'''Totally''' as shown above, sounds like a good idea to make a wifi warriors category. [[File:S3AHAWK_Signature_icon_1.png|20px]] [[User:S3AHAWK|<span style="font-family: Arial;color:Blue;">S3AHAWK</span>]] ([[User talk:S3AHAWK|''<span style=" font-family: Comic Sans MS;color: Red;">talk</span>'']])[[File:S3AHAWK_signature_icon_2.png|20px]] 02:27, July 24, 2020 (EDT)
:'''Support''', even though the category is already created. [[File:Grand Dad.png|23x20px]] [[User:NaughtyPigMario|<span style="color: red;">'''NPM'''</span>]]  [[User talk:NaughtyPigMario|''<span style="color: blue;">Morr!?</span>'']] [[File:NaughtyPigBoi.jpg|23x20px]] 03:12, July 24, 2020 (EDT)
:'''Support''', Its great idea not much to say. [[File:ThegameandwatchIcon2.png|20px]] [[User:Thegameandwatch|<span style=" color: Green;">'''Thegameandwatch'''</span>]] [[File:Thegameandwatch signature icon.png|20px]] [[User talk:Thegameandwatch|''<span style="color: blue;">The Nerd </span>'']] 22:36, July 24, 2020 (EDT)
== Policy on objective, informed handling of Buffs/Nerfs ==
'''Updated this on Dec 24th 2020 to be more clear on what's being asked for, and because there were no replies yet. I still want to see this pushed through sometime. Not expecting it this year, but it's something to go over in the new year for sure.'''
SmashWiki has a bit of a bad reputation for how it talks about character changes. I propose that proper, clear-cut policy is made for handling these. Pages such as Ultimate {{SSBU|Kirby}} and {{SSBU|Mr. Game & Watch}} have had some ''spectacularly'' bad reviews on changes that can even be considered laughable. This is particularly prevalent outside of changelogs; eg. Attributes, changes from previous games, and competitive play. I believe there should be a much higher quality standard for these pages.
This is the policy I want put forward;
'''1)''' When reviewing changes, said changes should be of competitive relevance and explain how they affected the character. For example, when Smash 4 Bowser gained Koo-Pah, that revolutionized his game plan. That is what should be in the change overviews, allowing you to sum up how patches have changed the character from a metagame perspective. A move dealing 1% more damage is likely not going to come up in competitive play unless something seriously incredible has happened.
'''2)''' Just listing off changes without explanation in some [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chewbacca_defense Chewbacca Defense] style should just be banned as a whole, that's for the changelog. If a character hasn't been affected much by patches, there is no need to bloat the overview with what's in the changelog; just say nothing relevant has happened, that more could hypothetically happen, and move on. The overview should not be taken as a second changelog, or you defeat its purpose.
'''3)''' Sensationalism should be just cut out. Talking about how Judge 9 has a 2× SDI multiplier as if it remotely affects the kill power should just not be a thing. Sensationalizing character changes only serves to make the character look worse than they are, and overstates how much patches matter overall. Patches radically changing characters are a rarity, not the norm.
I'll go over each of these, point by point.
===Point 1===
Here's {{SSBU|Snake}}'s ground game changes from Brawl;
:"In addition, while his ground game still remains strong, it has been nerfed in several ways; his neutral attack has less range and is significantly weaker, his forward tilt has less range, deals far less damage, the first hit has been altered removing its ability to trip and the second hit is slower and weaker. His up tilt's infamously deceptive horizontal range has been reduced, and the explosions from his explosion-based attacks can now be absorbed, worsening his matchups against Ness, Lucas, and Mr. Game & Watch."
The explosion-based attacks part? Great, that's what I want to see. It cites character matchups made worse as a result of the changes. I believe more detail could be used though, as the explosion-based attacks are hardly isolated to ground game.
However, the rest of this just falls apart. Jab, FTilt and UTilt are severely lacking in explanation, unlike what we see for explosion-based attacks. I think this is partly due to the explosion stuff being low-hanging fruit. Jab, in my opinion, was hardly a relevant change for Snake and is better suited for the changelog. FTilt's damage nerf actually made it connect into itself much less often, and less safe on shield, resulting in less in-context kill power; that would be a competitively relevant change that needs citing here. UTilt is still deceptively large, and in terms of how it's noted, it's very sacky and just kind of forced in. Overall, out of all of this, his FTilt and explosion changes were the only relevant parts of this section, which cuts that part in half. See my issue?
Here's the thing, when a character is changed, the following should be analyzed in order:
* The move's actual changes
* What the numbers mean; hitstun, safety on hit/shield, cooldown, etc.
* How this affects the character in-context (eg. Is the move now safe on whiff? Does the move combo?)
This is a basic overview, but you can put together what I mean now, right?
So for example, with Snake's FTilt...
:''"Forward tilt's damage was decreased, and the first hit's trip chance was removed, making it connect into itself less consistently. This also removed its trip-centric combos. The second hit was also made slower, further increasing the inconsistency. The lessened damage and increased lag, overall, has also significantly reduced its shield safety."''
While this isn't the best explanation, it should be a good example on how this kind of change is analyzed. Notice how entirely new points are bought up from simple analysis of what's there.
There's also the issue of little to no explanation being given on a nerf, when there should be. One example of poor explanation can be seen on {{SSBU|Pichu}}'s page, in the Changes from Melee section;
:''"Combined with it being the lightest character in the game and its fast falling speed, Pichu is also easy to combo despite having a small hurtbox size. However, this weakness became more exploitable in patch 3.1.0 as Pichu's hurtbox size increased, making it easier to hit as well."''
Not only does this have a double-parallel written in that makes it read worse than a low-level Falcon player trying to DAir in neutral, this doesn't explain ''what'' hurtbox was increased, thus leaving it with no context to the reader. Pichu's ear hurtboxes were what was increased (making Pichu overall bigger than Pikachu), and the shifts from Pichu's animations to make it slightly more difficult to hit than what's being represented here. This leads to a sensationalized "damage report" that makes the character look worse than they actually are. Why is this in the '''Melee changes''' section, by the way? Shouldn't this be in the Update History from a timeline perspective? I don't get it.
On top of this, the Pichu case doesn't actually explain how big the hurtbox change was. Moves that involve Pichu's ears (eg. USmash, NAir, FAir, Skull Bash) are made far less safe to throw out. It just says "easier to hit", when there are ways for Pichu to work around it. Moves such as DSmash have tons of intangibility, shield is a thing(!), etc. This should all be cited to show how the nerf affected Pichu's game plan. The surface-level analysis seen here is just poor and generally gives misleading information to the reader.
===Point 2===
God, I hate this. A lot of pages have a tendency to bloat the changes section just listing off changes without much attention. It's almost as if people who have never played the characters in their lives wrote them. They just list off the issues as if they were some kind of changelog, when said changelog is usually close by, thus defeating the purpose. It's redundant, uninformative and does nothing to show what the changes meant. All it does is serve to bloat the article.
For instance, let's look at {{SSBU|Duck Hunt}}'s changes from Smash 4, specifically regarding their aerials and Trick Shot setups.
:''"Some of their aerials have also been worsened: clean neutral aerial's noticeably lower knockback growth hinders its KO potential, forward aerial has a slightly shorter duration, and down aerial no longer auto-cancels with a short hop."''
:''"Lastly, Trick Shot has lost some of its set-ups into Clay Shooting, while the latter is harder to destroy and its shrapnel can also damage Duck Hunt."''
Notice a problem? Yeah, these sentences don't explain anything after the note on clean NAir. What does the shortened hitbox duration for FAir mean? What does the SHAC DAir removal mean? What setups were removed? What bearing do these have on DH's competitive relevance? '''You can't just list off the nerfs as if they all actually matter'''. You need to go over what these nerfs actually ''did'' to the character, you need context. The changelog is there for listing off this stuff. The part about setups here is almost what I want to see. The setups removed should be more detailed and explained, going over why these don't work as a result of the nerfs. That's what should be talked about, not just the numbers.
Now here's {{SSBU|Diddy Kong}}'s Ultimate page, which should have a very good analysis on what happened to him, right? After all, this is a fallen top tier.
:''His staple moves have all been worsened in various ways, hindering his once excellent neutral game; the most notable example is his Banana Peel, which cannot be grabbed as quickly due to himreleasing it at a higher arc, and although it can now be thrown twice at opponents before disappearing, this also gives them more opportunities to use it against him. Among other examples, Monkey Flip has more ending lag, up aerial is harder to hit due to possessing a large blind spot in front of Diddy, and his up tilt and down tilt, the latter having been previously infamous for easily setting up combos and KO setups into his up smash, have shorter range that makes them harder to take advantage of. ''
...the hell is this? Typos, weasel words, and what's basically a vague version of the changelog afterwards. Banana Peel is explained decently well, but then sensationalizes the part about it being thrown twice meaning it makes it easier to use against him. You know he has ways to confirm both hits and infinites, right...right? Monkey Flip's lag increase doesn't explain anything about its old movement utility, how it adversely affected his recovery, or anything. Then the writer added UAir, UTilt and DTilt into what should be different sentences entirely. UAir's blindspot citation doesn't go over decreased combo utility or anything. DTilt is talked about well, but UTilt is written in a very forced way, with attention directed away from it, making it out as if it shouldn't be noted at all. It's all extremely messy, which makes it hard for me to even explain why it's bad. There just isn't enough explanation.
===Point 3===
This one toes the line of objective VS subjective, but I think we can easily go over this. Many character change overviews have a severe issue with going over a few minor changes as if they're the end of the world or god's gift to mankind.
:''"Judge 9 has a much higher SDI multiplier (0× → 2×), allowing the opponent to manipulate their launch position to improve their chances of surviving, and shift their position when shielding the move to make it easier to punish, due to its high hitlag."''
I believe we can agree that this is a reach, since this move can still easily kill at what, 15%? Hell, human reaction time is hardly going to let this happen...it's insane. This is in the changelogs for Mr. Game & Watch from Smash 4 to Ultimate. A friend of mine who's basically the authority on this character tried to edit this once, only for it to come back with the text you see now.
This bit from Little Mac's Smash 4 to Ultimate changes also deserves some scrutiny.
:''"However, the removal of perfect pivoting, the universal reduction of jumpsquats and landing lag are the changes that hinder him more than any other character; the former change eliminates his extremely strong micro spacing tactics, while the changes to dash-canceling do not fully compensate for this.  Meanwhile, the latter two changes benefit his terrible aerial game far less while strengthening most of the cast's aerial games to varying degrees, making him more vulnerable to combos and aerial rushdowns, which limits him more to shielding a move or directly contesting them by making use of his smash attacks’ super armor to muscle through them, which can be risky."''
My issue here comes from "hinder him more than any other character". The explanation given is actually alright and provides something that many of these analyses have: '''greater metagame relevance'''. The talk about mechanical changes is great. But, the issue here is it uses the subjective opinion of Little Mac being hindered by all of those removals the most, '''as a definitive'''. I could argue Shulk's loss of perfect pivoting hurt him the most due to how long it was, or that Samus losing perfect pivot Charge Shot was problematic. I could also argue that the universal landing lag and jumpsquat decrease hurt King Dedede the most as it makes his already poor shield game easier to abuse. This, in my opinion, comes off as a sensationalist approach to analyzing Little Mac's changes. It's solid, but exaggerated in a way that reduces the objectivity.
Now read this, and tell me if you think this is a changelog note on {{SSBU|Joker}}'s page, or in the overview prior.
:''"In patch 3.1.0 a few game bugs were fixed, and Eigaon's hits now connect more reliably."''
Difficult, innit? It's actually in the overview, with no explanation. No analysis, no explanation on relevance, nothing. Just a vague repeat of what can just be...read in the changelog. If anything it's just taking up bytes. I hate it.
While I don't have the time or energy to get more, DracoRex can just talk about the absolute ridiculous history of the SSBU Kirby page where some guy tried to say Hammer's changes made it a camping tool.
---
I'm sure I missed bits and there could easily be more policy, but it's 11 PM and this is more just a hall of shame / mad rant at this point. --[[File:PlagueSigImage.png|20px]][[User:Plague von Karma|<span style="color: #e68;">'''Plague'''</span>]][[User talk:Plague von Karma|<span style="color: #e68;">''' von Karma'''</span>]][[File:PlagueSigImage.png|20px]] 18:07, July 25, 2020 (EDT)
Bumping this. I really want to see this get put through. --[[File:PlagueSigImage.png|20px]][[User:Plague von Karma|<span style="color: #e68;">'''Plague'''</span>]][[User talk:Plague von Karma|<span style="color: #e68;">''' von Karma'''</span>]][[File:PlagueSigImage.png|20px]] 17:13, September 2, 2020 (EDT)
:So from what I got from this is that we remove the unnecessary fluff such as nerfs/buffs that don't do anything to the character and elaborate more on the nerfs/buffs that matter. I believe this should just be common sense rather than policy but unfortunately we don't have many people checking over all the attributes sections. Thus, I don't see a problem in any of this. [[User:Cookies and Creme|<span style="font-family: Georgia;color: black;">Cookies</span>]][[File:CnC Signature.png|20px]][[User talk:Cookies and Creme|<span style="font-family: Georgia; color: black;">Creme</span>]] 00:23, March 18, 2021 (EDT)
== Link to game specific character pages in type pages==
Generally, when referring to moves that fall under a specific category (such as the [[Effect]] pages), moves that are only used by a character in one game (i.e Ultimate newcomer moves, custom moves in Smash 4, moves that only appeared in one game) link to the [[Mario (SSBU)|game specific character page]] rather than the [[Mario|general character page]]. However, this is not the case for the [[type]] pages, making an inconsistency.
It is arguably best for type pages to link directly to the game specific character page when a move is only used in one game for the following reasons:
*Consistency with other pages.
*Allows the reader to easily find a detailed description of the move they are looking for.
*If the reader is looking for the general character page, it is linked at the top of the game specific character page.
*Navigating from the game specific character page to the general character page is easier to navigate than the other way around, as the general character page can link to up to five game specific character pages, with only one of them containing the information the reader is looking for.
For a visual on how this is formatted, I recommend scanning over the character links on the [[Electric]] and [[Flame]] pages. Both have various examples of how this is format is used.
[[User:RandomUltimate|RandomUltimate]] ([[User talk:RandomUltimate|talk]]) 13:34, September 3, 2020 (EDT)
:It very much seems to me as though linking to pages differently for some fighters than others, as you are suggesting, is in itself inconsistent. Contrary to what you have claimed, it is remarkably easy to find the game specific articles for fighters, as you can just click the links at the very top of the general fighter articles. Also, I really don't know what you're talking about when you say that it's not as easy to get to a game specific article from a general article, as the reasoning you give is that there can be up to 5 games linked to, but you're only proposing we link to game-specific articles for fighters who are only in one game, in which case there'd only be one link anyway, making your argument invalid. Finally, if you wanted further information on a specific move, you'd likely only find significant detail on it if it has its own article, in which case we can simply link to the relevant article in the column with the move listed.
:Frankly, I think the effect articles should adopt the convention of the type articles, and not the other way around. ''[[User:Alex the weeb|<span style="color: blue;">'''Alex'''</span>]] the [[User talk:Alex the weeb|<span style="color: red;">'''Weeb'''</span>]]'' 13:59, September 3, 2020 (EDT)
::I can see where you are coming from, but first off we should not assume the intellect of the reader, nor how well they know how to navigate the wiki. Regarding details on a move's article, not all information on that page is always present, such as % given which is always found on game specific character pages. Also, some move pages do not exist, such as various get-up attack pages. Your statement about linking to the the article on a move can be a problem in cases where you would have to link more than one article (for example, linking Mario's f-smash to their own articles on the [[flame]] article would require 4 or 5 links. Your statement about linking to game-specific articles for fighters only Ultimate ignore my statement about custom moves and moves that have been removed or replaced. For example, pit's Final Smash in Smash 4 would be found in the flame article, but not his Final Smash in Brawl or Ultimate. Therefore, you would link to [[Pit (SSB4)]] since it refers to a move he only uses in Smash 4. Finally, I'd like to point out that special move articles are already linked to in the articles. [[User:RandomUltimate|RandomUltimate]] ([[User talk:RandomUltimate|talk]]) 14:23, September 3, 2020 (EDT)
:::I don't think you properly understand what I have said. It is very easy to get from general articles to game specific articles, so if you are concerned about users being unable to figure this out, you should also be concerned about getting to general articles from game specific articles. You are correct that some move pages do not exist, but in which case it's even less likely that you'd be able to find much detail on the game specific articles, but this doesn't matter because, again, it is very easy to get to these articles. Also, due to the way that tables are laid out, it would still be impossible to link to SSB4 character articles, as we would link to the general article, due to all SSB4 characters being in Ultimate, and thus there aren't any cases where this would apply. ''[[User:Alex the weeb|<span style="color: blue;">'''Alex'''</span>]] the [[User talk:Alex the weeb|<span style="color: red;">'''Weeb'''</span>]]'' 14:36, September 3, 2020 (EDT)
::::I understand what you mean about how easy it is to get to articles but not all readers will recognise the abbreviations or the names of the smash games, however getting from a game specific character page to a general character page is much easier since there is only one link as opposed to up to five, which like I said, not all readers will recognise the abbreviations used. And I have no clue what you mean about it being impossible to link SSB4 articles. For example, the [[paralyse]] page lists a decent amount of custom moves that are only in Smash 4, and in those cases it links to the game specific character page for Smash 4. If it were to link to the general character page, readers may have a problem looking for that specific move since it is exclusive to one game. If it were to link to the Ultimate page, that would put the reader off track. [[User:RandomUltimate|RandomUltimate]] ([[User talk:RandomUltimate|talk]]) 15:33, September 3, 2020 (EDT)
:::::For me it is less about ease of getting to the fighter page and more about consistency. I think many would find it jarring to, for example, be going through [[arm]], clicking through the fighters and be confused why Wolf took them to his general page and Zelda took them to her Brawl page. There's also the less important editing side. In the event that Smash 6 comes out then some fighters introduced in Ultimate that reappear will need to have their links changed. (It's also easier to but the square brackets than to check the game for each fighter) --[[User:CanvasK|CanvasK]] ([[User talk:CanvasK|talk]]) 18:12, September 3, 2020 (EDT)
::::::The editing side won't be a problem, like in all previous games, the newcomer characters would get announced in advance before the game is released, allowing us to create their character pages and game specific character pages in advance. When the game is released to the public, the wiki would be put in the red zone, and plenty of articles would be edited daily. Changing the characters links is not hard, as the only thing required is changing the "[" to a "{" at times, as well as adding the abbreviation of the game.[[User:RandomUltimate|RandomUltimate]] ([[User talk:RandomUltimate|talk]]) 12:02, September 4, 2020 (EDT)
:::::::Which is why I mentioned it was less important. I think I was tired of making the tables that specific links wasn't on my mind.
:::::::I would like to mention the tables for the [[Attack]] pages. [[Dash attack]], [[floor attack]], and [[neutral special move]] all have tables which link to the general fighter page, even for fighters who've only been in one game (ie Ultimate DLC fighters). --[[User:CanvasK|CanvasK]] ([[User talk:CanvasK|talk]]) 12:37, September 4, 2020 (EDT)
::::::::Those pages should be left that way since it lists all characters in all iterations, rather than specific moves that may only apply to one game. All of the Ultimate newcomers in those pages would link to their general character page. However the type and effect pages list only certain characters that apply, with only certains moves that can sometimes only be found in one game. If this only applied to Ultimate newcomers, linking to general character pages would not be a problem because that page only links to one game specific character page. However, this also applies to custom moves and moves in previous games, where linking to the general character page could lead to confusion. Linking Ultimate newcomers to their game specific character page on type and effect pages is done just for consistency. [[User:RandomUltimate|RandomUltimate]] ([[User talk:RandomUltimate|talk]]) 17:03, September 4, 2020 (EDT)
I've been reading your back and forth about this. I don't have any particular opinion about it, but seeing you all caught up in that debate about what option is the best, I think you forgot something: Why not both? The wiki could simply propose, each time a fighter is mentionned, both a link to its general page and a link to each game related page, something like this:
:[[Mario]] ([[Mario (SSB)|SSB]], [[Mario (SSBM)|SSBM]], [[Mario (SSBB)|SSBB]], [[Mario (SSB4)|SSB4]], [[Mario (SSBU)|SSBU]]) (or rather the same thing with the game icons instead, would be cleaner)
A template could even be made for that so every time a character is referenced, the users have direct access to any page they want. And I'm going the lazy way here, but if someone is motivated enough to make it, the template could even be designed to be a lot more fancy, like putting the name of a fighter as a direct link to its general page, but adding next to that name a single sub-menu icon which, when clicked, open a pop-up list with the links to each game specific fighter page. [[User:YoshiRyu|YoshiRyu]] ([[User talk:YoshiRyu|talk]]) 03:37, September 5, 2020 (EDT)
:I think the only way something like that could work is to do something like this with the game icons: [[Image:SSBU Icon.png|{{{2|16px}}}|link=Banjo & Kazooie (SSBU)]]. ''[[User:Alex the weeb|<span style="color: blue;">'''Alex'''</span>]] the [[User talk:Alex the weeb|<span style="color: red;">'''Weeb'''</span>]]'' 03:57, September 5, 2020 (EDT)
::I thought about suggesting listing all of the games, but something rubbed me the wrong way originally. Anyways, [[User:CanvasK/Sandbox|here's my idea]] on how to do that. Also wouldn't this be better discussed on the Type talk page since that is the only thing of concern? --[[User:CanvasK|CanvasK]] ([[User talk:CanvasK|talk]]) 06:52, September 5, 2020 (EDT)
:::I agree that this is the best way to handle the situation, and it does not take up much space on the article. [[User:RandomUltimate|RandomUltimate]] ([[User talk:RandomUltimate|talk]]) 10:22, September 8, 2020 (EDT)
==How to name Lucario and Charizard's Smash 4 final smash articles==
The discussion for this is extremely fragmented (and confusingly executed) on the respective articles, so I figured I'd put this here. Most final smash article names follow the official final smash names, but [[Mega Charizard X]] and [[Mega Lucario]] are an exception to this. It has been argued that these should not be exceptions to this rule, however both final smashes share the same official name, "Mega Evolution", which means that some form of unofficial distinction between the two titles would need to be made.
So far, one solution has been suggested: we name the articles "Mega Evolution (Charizard)" and "Mega Evolution (Lucario)". This would be consistent with the method used for distinguishing the trophy names in Smash 4. What are your thoughts on this, and do you have any alternate suggestions for how to handle this? ''[[User:Alex the weeb|<span style="color: blue;">'''Alex'''</span>]] the [[User talk:Alex the weeb|<span style="color: red;">'''Weeb'''</span>]]'' 06:32, September 26, 2020 (EDT)
:Personally I believe SmashWiki is not official should only be applied to fan terms, so I agree with the split. [[User:Cookies and Creme|<span style="font-family: Georgia;color: black;">Cookies</span>]][[File:CnC Signature.png|20px]][[User talk:Cookies and Creme|<span style="font-family: Georgia; color: black;">Creme</span>]] 23:43, October 17, 2020 (EDT)
::I just looked at the Mega Charizard X page and the trophy does say "Mega Evolution (Charizard)" so Alex is indeed correct about that. Still, some Pokémon newcomers who just learned about these Pokémon may be confusing in the case of Charizard (which it has a Y form) whereas Lucario has only 1 Mega Evolution form. I would prefer using the official Pokémon names for their Mega Evolution forms because of Ultimate's spirits. [[User:S3AHAWK|<span style="font-family: Arial;color: maroon; 0px">S3AHAWK</span>]] [[User talk:S3AHAWK|''<span style=" font-family: Comic Sans MS;color:#FF4500;">The Thankful One</span>'']][[File:S3AHAWK_Signature_icon_1.png|20px]] 16:46, November 6, 2020 (EST)
:::This change would be in reference to the names of the final smashes, rather than the characters (who themselves probably aren't notable enough to have an entire article dedicated to themselves, but rather just an origin section on the final smash articles). I'd like to remind everyone that there's no reason why this change should be controversial, as every other final smash article uses the correct final smash names, regardless of what characters appear in them. Mega Charizard X would still redirect to the final smash article, like how with any minor character we would redirect their name to the most significant mention of them in other articles (such as the names of spirits that redirect to their respective series' spirit lists). ''[[User:Alex the weeb|<span style="color: blue;">'''Alex'''</span>]] the [[User talk:Alex the weeb|<span style="color: red;">'''Weeb'''</span>]]'' 03:30, November 7, 2020 (EST)
:I personally '''support''' this, it's a no-brainer and should be common sense. I also believe that referencing Mega Evolution in the pages for [[Lucario]] and [[Charizard]] as a subheading is worth exploring as an alternative to making a new page, which was suggested somewhere above. The forms aren't really deserving of their own pages, and considering this, it doesn't make sense in the first place. Hell, if you really want to, you could cite Bulbapedia's handling along with it. This methodology is technically halfway done for both, with Charizard and Lucario both having their Mega Evolution spirits on their pages. Something like "In Smash 4..." and "In Ultimate..." thing could be done, then "Lucario mega evolves and can be controlled in Smash 4/Ultimate...", maybe? If absolutely necessary, I'd happily write it up as a Pokemon superfan myself, though I'm pretty withdrawn from Smash at this point and would rather avoid it. [[File:PlagueSigImage.png|20px]][[User:Plague von Karma|<span style="color: #e68;">'''Plague'''</span>]][[User talk:Plague von Karma|<span style="color: #e68;">''' von Karma'''</span>]][[File:PlagueSigImage.png|20px]] 06:15, November 7, 2020 (EST)
==Create interwiki templates for non-NIWA wikis==
I brought this up on the Discord, but seeing as there are now many characters in ''Smash'' from series that do not have NIWA wikis, I would like to ask if there's room to consider adding non-NIWA wikis to the interwiki templates. This would allow for, for example, infoboxes and such to link to these wikis. The primary ones I'm sure can be added with no drawbacks are the ''Banjo-Kazooie'' wiki ([https://banjokazooiewiki.com/wiki/Main_Page Jiggywikki]; independent and high-quality) and the ''Minecraft'' wiki ([https://minecraft.gamepedia.com/Minecraft_Wiki on Gamepedia]; official and also high-quality). Most others only have Wikia/Fandom wikis, which would be more tenuous to include without further discussion. I think this would be worthwhile for streamlining and avoiding having an "External Links" section at the end of every third-party character's article. Would it be worth considering, and does it follow the current policies in place as of now? ~ [[User:Serena Strawberry|<span style="color: #e68;">'''Serena Strawberry'''</span>]] ([[User talk:Serena Strawberry|talk]]) 19:05, October 2, 2020 (EDT)
:'''Support'''. I really see no downside to this, though I wonder how far we should go into this. For example should we also link to series exclusively tied to a Mii Fighter costume? [[User:SenorMexicano|<span style="color:#850FFA; text-shadow: 0px 0px 3px green">'''Señor'''</span> <span style="color:#850FFA;text-shadow:0px 0px 3px green">'''Mexicano'''</span>]] ''[[User talk:SenorMexicano|<span style="color:lightpurple;text-shadow:0px 0px 2px lightgreen">(talk)</span>]]'' 20:44, October 2, 2020 (EDT)
::I would say playable universes only, since the rest wouldn't have enough representation for a template to be useful. ~ [[User:Serena Strawberry|<span style="color: #e68;">'''Serena Strawberry'''</span>]] ([[User talk:Serena Strawberry|talk]]) 20:49, October 2, 2020 (EDT)
To add onto this a bit, the ''Minecraft'' wiki feels like it'd be the most natural one to partner with, and I was considering asking them if they would like to make it a formal partnership—cross-referencing where possible and so on. I'm guessing that'd require permission from people higher up than me, though. The others would just be useful to have links to. ~ [[User:Serena Strawberry|<span style="color: #e68;">'''Serena Strawberry'''</span>]] ([[User talk:Serena Strawberry|talk]]) 21:53, October 2, 2020 (EDT)
:Bump for this, as more people are active now. ~ [[User:Serena Strawberry|<span style="color: #e68;">'''Serena Strawberry'''</span>]] ([[User talk:Serena Strawberry|talk]]) 16:57, October 3, 2020 (EDT)
::'''Support.''' We can't just be limited to NIWA wikis especially with ''Smash'' introducing more and more 3rd party characters. [[User:Cookies and Creme|<span style="font-family: Georgia;color: black;">Cookies</span>]][[File:CnC Signature.png|20px]][[User talk:Cookies and Creme|<span style="font-family: Georgia; color: black;">Creme</span>]] 23:41, October 17, 2020 (EDT)
::'''Support.''' I think for Gamepedia and Wikia/Fandom they can be handled by a single template with a similar syntax to [[Template:Iw]] because the links share the same format (except Fandom includes "/wiki" after ".com"). --[[User:CanvasK|CanvasK]] ([[User talk:CanvasK|talk]]) 15:46, November 3, 2020 (EST)
:::Bump. Since Fandom acquired Wikia at some point, there is no need to check for which one is needed since all Wikia links will redirect to Fandom. A simple template like <nowiki>{{fandom|subdomain|article|<bracket text>}}</nowiki> ought to work. --[[User:CanvasK|CanvasK]] ([[User talk:CanvasK|talk]]) 14:42, February 13, 2021 (EST)
==Clearing up the stubs==
So I noticed that most stubs are either pro smashers or frame stats for moves. I don't know how to elaborate further on, sonics floor attack for example. Since it's pretty impossible to do so, shouldn't they be taken off the stub list?
[[User:Psiwonderwall|Psiwonderwall]] ([[User talk:Psiwonderwall|talk]]) 10:02, October 26, 2020 (EDT)psi wonderwall Ω
== Disallow the shorthand "Smash Ultimate" ==
Quite simply, because I don't understand why people refer to ''Ultimate'' as "Smash Ultimate", yet don't refer to ''Melee'' as "Smash Melee" or ''Brawl'' as "Smash Brawl". <span style="font-family:Mario Party 2/3 Textbox">[[User:RickTommy|<span style="color:red">Rick</span>]][[User talk:RickTommy|<span style="color:green">Tommy</span>]]</span> 06:13, November 9, 2020 (EST)
:I think the reason why people use "Smash Ultimate" and not "Smash Melee/Brawl" is because you can describe something as being "ultimate" but you can't quite describe something as being "melee" or "brawl". What if I take the headline "New Smash Ultimate DLC" and change it to "New Ultimate DLC"? Unless I went into the article knowing it is about ''Smash'' then I don't know what game the DLC is for, and whatever game that is it for sounds like it is going to be the ultimate DLC, the best DLC. I can think of some ways of doing something similar with "melee" or "brawl" that could cause some ambiguity, but not as much as "ultimate". Now, as for using it in the mainspace of a ''Smash'' oriented wiki, I have no real opinions on it right now. --[[User:CanvasK|CanvasK]] ([[User talk:CanvasK|talk]]) 08:40, November 9, 2020 (EST)
::Lol i thought it is just because ''Smash Ultimate'' sounds good compare to ''Smash Melee'' and ''Smash Brawl'', simply ''Melee'' sounds better than ''Smash Melee'' and ''Smash Brawl'' kinda sounds like ''Smash Bro''. So I think people just naturally use ''Smash Ultimate'' plus it sounds natural kinda, saying something like "the best ''Smash Ultimate'' player in the world". As whether they should be disallowed, not entirely sure but I think the Wiki always prefers to have consistentcy so maybe we have to pick a choice and discard this phrase idk. [[File:Grand Dad.png|23x20px]] [[User:NaughtyPigMario|<span style="color: red;">'''NPM'''</span>]]  [[User talk:NaughtyPigMario|''<span style="color: blue;">Morr!?</span>'']] [[File:NaughtyPigBoi.jpg|23x20px]] 09:07, November 9, 2020 (EST)
:Does it even matter? If people commonly use one phrase then we should allow it. '''Oppose.''' [[User:Cookies and Creme|<span style="font-family: Georgia;color: black;">Cookies</span>]][[File:CnC Signature.png|20px]][[User talk:Cookies and Creme|<span style="font-family: Georgia; color: black;">Creme</span>]] 11:47, November 9, 2020 (EST)
It's quite clearly a carryover from "Smash 4". People use the term, and the Wiki reflects community terms. I agree that "Ultimate" and "SSBU" are better for general use, but common community terms should not be banned or frowned upon. ''[[User:Alex the weeb|<span style="color: blue;">'''Alex'''</span>]] the [[User talk:Alex the weeb|<span style="color: red;">'''Weeb'''</span>]]'' 12:06, November 9, 2020 (EST)
:'''Oppose''', Why does this matter? Smash Ultimate is as common as Ultimate and SSBU. [[File:ThegameandwatchIcon2.png|20px]] [[User:Thegameandwatch|<span style=" color: red;">'''Thegameandwatch'''</span>]] [[File:ThegameandwatchIcon3.png|20px]] [[User talk:Thegameandwatch|''<span style="color: cyan;">The Nerd </span>'']] 17:13, November 9, 2020 (EST)
:'''Oppose''' In addition to the reasons above, disallowing a common community term on the grounds of it being "inconsistant" with past shorthands is a highly subjective arguement. '''[[User:Omega Toad|<font color="blue">Omegɑ</font>]] [[User talk:Omega Toad|<font color="blue">Toɑd</font>]]''' [[File:Toad.png|20px]] 18:07, November 9, 2020 (EST)
::'''Oppose''' As other stated, I see no reason to ban normal community terms. [[User:Superbound|Superbound]] ([[User talk:Superbound|talk]]) 06:24, December 19, 2020 (EST)
== New usergroup idea ==
This will just be throwing out ideas, depending on how it goes I may start a more formal proposal. Partial blocks were recently implemented, so far they're only used to apply probation. Since I first heard of it back in may I've always had an idea for a usergroup that only has access to partial blocks. Basically this usergroup will be more of an upgrade from rollback who's purpose is to counter vandalism, so this usergroup will be using partial blocks to block the obvious vandal accounts, while actions that require full sitewide blocks will be left to admins with more discernment, such as a sockpuppet or similar problematic user. Like rollback this will ''only'' be used on obvious vandalism.
Right now the reason partial blocks are only used to replace probation is because a vandal can just move to another page they're allowed to edit and be more of a chore to deal with. However if partial blocks are given to another usergroup, then they'll be able to better stall vandals until an admin comes to fully block them if needed.
Yes I know we've had at least 3 proposals to make a usergroup lower than admins, with all of them failing for a good reason: they're too similar to admins, so if a user is ready to be a jr admin then more than likely they'll be ready for full adminship. This is different though, because the only new tool this group will have after rollback is partial blocks, which are more to stop vandalism and are much less powerful than sitewide blocks, which are more like punishments for problematic users.
So right now this will just be to get ideas and hear users thoughts, if it seems like a good idea then I'll upgrade this to a proper proposal. Until then I'm currently '''neutral''' '''[[User:Omega Toad|<font color="blue">Omegɑ</font>]] [[User talk:Omega Toad|<font color="blue">Toɑd</font>]]''' [[File:Toad.png|20px]] 20:05, November 11, 2020 (EST)
:Is it a requirement to have rollback privelages? I am just wondering [[User:S3AHAWK|<span style="font-family: Arial;color: maroon; 0px">S3AHAWK</span>]] [[User talk:S3AHAWK|''<span style=" font-family: Comic Sans MS;color:#FF4500;">The Thankful One</span>'']][[File:S3AHAWK_Signature_icon_1.png|20px]] 20:08, November 11, 2020 (EST)
::Like RFAs having rollback is not a requirement to request this position. '''[[User:Omega Toad|<font color="blue">Omegɑ</font>]] [[User talk:Omega Toad|<font color="blue">Toɑd</font>]]''' [[File:Toad.png|20px]] 20:10, November 11, 2020 (EST)
:What exactly do you think partial blocks do? Because unless this new user group was only given the ability to partial block from 1 or 2 specific namespaces, then they could simply apply multiple partial blocks to the same user. And if they were restricted to certain namespaces, then depending on if that includes namespace it would either be too similar to the power of a regular block, or to weak to really be worth dedicating a user group for. The only conceivable uses for partial blocks on this Wiki, at least that I can think of, would require making judgement calls about which namespaces a user needs to be blocked from, which requires both the ability to partial block from any potential namespace, and the judgement skills of the typical admin, to be used effectively.
:Now, if you're talking about increasing the usage of existing groups, then maybe some extra rights could be granted to established users, but the ability to block, even just partially, other users isn't one of them. ''[[User:Alex the weeb|<span style="color: blue;">'''Alex'''</span>]] the [[User talk:Alex the weeb|<span style="color: red;">'''Weeb'''</span>]]'' 20:16, November 11, 2020 (EST)
::I did say on the [[Forum:Implement a Partial Block|partial block proposal]] that a user on wikipedia was blocked from editing KSI's page for "Disruptive editing." [[User:S3AHAWK|<span style="font-family: Arial;color: maroon; 0px">S3AHAWK</span>]] [[User talk:S3AHAWK|''<span style=" font-family: Comic Sans MS;color:#FF4500;">The Thankful One</span>'']][[File:S3AHAWK_Signature_icon_1.png|20px]] 20:29, November 11, 2020 (EST)
::This is to counter vandalism, which anyone can do. If a user knows what to use rollback on then they should be able to know what to use partial blocks on. Most vandals usually focus on one or two namespaces anyway, so if they were restricted to one or two namespaces that would be able to stop them, while major vandals who try to vandalise the entire site be fully blocked by regular admins. This is not to be used against sockpuppets, TC blocks, or similar problematic users that require judgement calls from admins. You don't need to be a judge to know what a vandal is, it's pretty obvious. And if it is possible then admins can be immune to partial blocks.
::Again this could be one of those that only sound good on paper, hence why I put it here instead of a full proposal and why I'm neutral. '''[[User:Omega Toad|<font color="blue">Omegɑ</font>]] [[User talk:Omega Toad|<font color="blue">Toɑd</font>]]''' [[File:Toad.png|20px]] 20:32, November 11, 2020 (EST)
:::I'd be lying if I said I haven't thought about the Jr Admin idea before. I've even found the old proposals from many a year ago. It sounds like a good idea on paper, and I'll even admit that I believe dedicated anti-vandals like myself would benefit from it. I'm just not sure how it would work in practice. [[User:Black Vulpine|<span style="color: black;">'''Black Vulpine'''</span>]] of the [[User talk:Black Vulpine|🦊'''Furry Nation'''🐺]]. [[Special:Contributions/Black Vulpine|<span style="color: #CC5500">'''Furries make the internets go! :3'''</span>]] 20:47, November 11, 2020 (EST)
"Block" and "partial block" cannot be given to usergroups independently, it's both or none. So the root idea of this proposal is invalid. [[User:Toomai|Toomai]] [[User talk:Toomai|Glittershine]] [[Image:Toomai.png|20px|link=User:Toomai/Bin|???]] The Chronicler 22:39, November 11, 2020 (EST)
==Major Vs. Minor glitch clarification==
I am making this as a follow up to the "glitch pages" proposal made several months ago. In that article, we all decided that only major glitches should have a dedicated article and minor glitches should not. However, no one made any specific rules to differentiate the two. The only ones I was able to find is that major glitches are "notable and famous" and minor glitches "get patched out." I think that is too vague for an entire category and may cause confusion on what glitches count as major or minor. I believe what should happen is that in the category page for glitches, an official constitution should be made that explains the differences between major and minor glitches. Below is a section for comments where everyone can give their opinions on whether this is a good idea and give any requirements if they have any.[[User:The Other Jared|The Other Jared]] ([[User talk:The Other Jared|talk]]) 15:37, November 23, 2020 (EST)
===Comments===
I feel like this is a bit unfair to say, but I'd almost be willing to argue that the major glitches are the older ones that everyone knows about (i.e., the [[Name Entry Glitch]]), whereas the minor glitches are the newer ones that quickly get patched out (i.e., the Buster Wolf freeze glitch). The problem is that the internet is a much different place than it was 20 years ago, so information wasn't quite as widespread as it is now (nor was the community as big as it is now), and the line between what's "famous" and "not famous" is blurry; I think the distinction should instead be made between what is "notable" and "not notable". Even then, I'd still argue that a glitch that lets Nana be frozen in place if she gets hit by Buster Wolf or a glitch that lets Meta Knight phase through blocks after getting KO'd isn't on the same level as a glitch that lets you play as the game's final boss. It becomes a really gray area if we look at it like that, but I think that that will still make it easier to distinguish the two. [[User:Aidanzapunk|<span style="color: red;">'''Aidan'''</span>]], [[User talk:Aidanzapunk|<span style="color: orange;">'''the Thankful Rurouni'''</span>]] 15:53, November 23, 2020 (EST)
That's a totally fair point to bring up. My issue is that pretending these "minor" glitches don't exist doesn't feel like the right thing to do. I came up with the requirements that major glitches are either extremely easy to perform or cause catastrophic effects. On the other hand, minor glitches are much more niche and affect the game on a minimal level. Minor glitches could also be specific to a character or a stage. While thinking about this, I came up with the idea of adding a ''Glitches'' section to character and stage articles where applicable. That will definitely be a lot of work, but having that and giving major glitches their own category might make everyone happy.[[User:The Other Jared|The Other Jared]] ([[User talk:The Other Jared|talk]]) 00:56, November 24, 2020 (EST)
In my mind these are the things that ought to be considered when classifying a glitch:
'''Relevance''' - is the glitch current, or has it been patched out? Does the glitch affect the competitive scene or in some way warrant a response from the scene? An example is that the Name Entry Glitch is explicitly banned, making it very relevant
'''Occurrence''' - is the glitch likely to occur unintentionally? How easy/difficult is it to trigger the glitch intentionally? The [[Invisible ceiling glitch]] triggers all the time for example.
'''Significance''' - does the glitch have a major impact on gameplay when it is triggered? Is the glitch commonly discussed due to the effects it can have? An example of this would be the [[Z-axis glitch]], which while it doesn't really meet the top 2 criteria is a very popular glitch, and one with a significant effect on gameplay.
''[[User:Alex the weeb|<span style="color: blue;">'''Alex'''</span>]] the [[User talk:Alex the weeb|<span style="color: red;">'''Weeb'''</span>]]'' 08:48, November 24, 2020 (EST)
===List is up===
I made the preliminary list for what constitutes a major glitch. Feel free to add or change anything about it if you want to.[[User:The Other Jared|The Other Jared]] ([[User talk:The Other Jared|talk]]) 15:04, November 24, 2020 (EST)
==Dedicated glitch section==
Thought I would give this its own section. I thought about giving every character and stage article a "Glitches" section where applicable. This could be the place where the minor glitches can be placed without clogging up the glitch category.
===Support===
===Oppose===
== Use All-Star Mode as reference for "debut" sections in infoboxes ==
<s>This isn't a major issue, but one I feel like is worth addressing regardless; a recent proposal was made to change Cloud's debut to a demo version of ''Final Fantasy VII'' that released in 1996. This failed to pass, because most users expressed disagreement with the sentiment that an early-bird appearance (such as a demo) should count as a debut. Right now, several characters have "technical debuts" listed in cases where they may have appeared before their official debut. But we have actual, official reference for when each character debuted: the [[All-Star Mode]] page. This doesn't count early-bird appearances and only lists their official debut in their own series, and might be useful to avoid getting into the weeds for stuff like this.
It'd specifically affect the following characters:
*[[Kirby]]: Official debut is ''Kirby's Dream Land'', cameoed in ''Arcana'' beforehand.
*[[Luigi]]: Official debut is ''Mario Bros.'' (arcade), appeared in ''Mario Bros.'' (Game & Watch) beforehand.
*[[Ganondorf]]: Official debut is ''The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time''. The debuts of Ganon and the "Ganondorf" name are also listed, which I think is fine to keep.
*[[Roy]]: Official debut is ''Fire Emblem: The Binding Blade'', appeared in ''Melee'' beforehand.
*[[Mr. Game & Watch]]: Official debut is ''Ball'', Mr. Game & Watch as a character debuted in ''Melee''. I think this is also fine to keep since Mr. Game & Watch is a ''Smash'' invention.
*[[Lucario]]: Official debut is ''Pokémon Diamond and Pearl'', cameoed in ''Pokémon Mystery Dungeon'' beforehand.
*[[Sonic]]: Official debut is ''Sonic the Hedgehog'' (1991), cameoed in ''Rad Mobile'' beforehand.
*[[Toon Link]]: Official debut is ''The Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker'', "toon" artstyle first appeared in ''The Legend of Zelda: Four Swords''.
*[[Little Mac]]: Official debut is ''Punch-Out!!'' arcade. Could probably just make a slight tweak to say that "Little Mac" as a name debuted in the NES version.
*[[Banjo]]: Official debut is ''Banjo-Kazooie'', appeared in ''Diddy Kong Racing'' beforehand.
*[[Byleth]]: Official debut is ''Fire Emblem: Three Houses'', appeared in ''Fire Emblem Heroes'' beforehand.
*[[Steve]] (and other ''Minecraft'' characters): 2011 is considered ''Minecraft''{{'}}s official release date, but 2009 is when the first public alpha was released. This is probably worth a separate discussion, but I think this is fine to keep as well.
The basic idea is to avoid unnecessary clutter and go with the concise official answer, regardless of any previous appearances. As Miles put it, "If someone (somehow) doesn't know what game Cloud first appeared in, they should be able to go to the infobox and see 'Final Fantasy VII (1997)' without any extraneous information". Same deal with all the other characters. Maybe changing the infobox parameter to "official debut" would help clarify this as well. ~ [[User:StrawberryChan|<span style="color: #e68;">'''StrawberryChan'''</span>]] ([[User talk:StrawberryChan|talk]]) 20:15, January 14, 2021 (EST)</s>
:The tough part is that there's kind of inherently going to be a case-by-case nature to these without a neat one-size-fits-all answer. Banjo's appearance in Diddy Kong Racing versus Lucario's minor cameo in Pokemon Mystery Dungeon are pretty different in significance, and the Minecraft stuff is itself a separate conversation as you said. I don't know that trying to make any overly-broad blanket rules will be a good approach. [[User:Miles of SmashWiki|<font color="dodgerblue"><span style="font-family:Verdana;">'''Miles''']] <font color="silver">([[User talk:Miles of SmashWiki|<font color="silver">talk]])</font></font></span></font> 20:23, January 14, 2021 (EST)
:The All Star criterion is finicky because many characters wouldn't change their position in the given order regardless of what their debut is counted as, many of these happened in the span of a few months if not just weeks. In fact the only ones that would shift position with cameos and "unofficial debuts" counted are just Lucario, Banjo (but you could argue it is counting the debut of the Banjo & Kazooie duo) and Steve. Also obligatory [[SW:OFFICIAL]] mention. Side note I don't think it's necessary to mention Ganon's debut in Ganondorf's infobox when Ganon has [[Ganon|his own]]. [[User:Rdrfc|Rdrfc]] ([[User talk:Rdrfc|talk]]) 05:24, January 15, 2021 (EST)
:Understandable points from these two comments; I don't think I fully thought this through. Still, I would like to do something about the "technical debut" listings, because they really bother me in terms of making things less clear in exchange for being "more accurate". ~ [[User:StrawberryChan|<span style="color: #e68;">'''StrawberryChan'''</span>]] ([[User talk:StrawberryChan|talk]]) 16:05, January 15, 2021 (EST)
== Merge [[Challenger's Approach]] with [[Unlockable character]] ==
I've looked very closely at [[Challenger's Approach]], and for the most part there's very little that actually talks about this mode and there's more info on what fighters can be unlocked from this mode, duplicated from [[Unlockable character]]. I would also like to point out that Challenger's Approach is essential a mode to rechallenge an opponent after failing to defeat them, almost identical to how previous games handled refighting challengers if the players fails. Merging the two articles would be viable, since they both deal with unlocking fighters. -- [[User:PanchamBro|PanchamBro]] ([[User talk:PanchamBro|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/PanchamBro|contributions]]) 10:10, January 17, 2021 (EST)
== Grouping together some Echo Fighters in metagame/competitive contexts. ==
I am bringing up this proposal after a discussion on Discord about categorization of professional players.
As most of you probably already know, several Echo Fighters in ''Ultimate'' do not have any notable gameplay difference, and could be effectively be considered alternate costumes. The characters in question are:
*'''Peach''' and '''Daisy''': As of version 3.0.0, these fighters do not have any gameplay difference at all, with their only differences being purely aesthetic.
*'''Simon''' and '''Richter''': Their only differences are the elemental properties of Holy Water, which without items on have an effect on about three matchups out of more than 80. They are otherwise fully identical.
*'''Samus''' and '''Dark Samus''': These fighters are differentiated by a small amount of slight changes, that slightly favor one or the other in certain situations but do not appear to have an effect significant enough to have consistent metagame reasoning between choosing among them.
*'''Pit''' and '''Dark Pit''': The grayest case out of these four, although still a pretty dark shade. Their neutral and side specials are different enough, but it's only them, with the rest being completely identical. Although compared to previous characters, a Pit player is probably going to make their choice with metagame considerations in mind(i.e. which arrow will be more effective at gimping certain recoveries), the differences are still so small that they can adjust without effort. This also applies to their appearance in ''SSB4''.
With presentations out of the way, some people have noticed that on wiki we seem to have a tendency to treat these characters as completely separate metagame entities, despite the incredibly minimal differences. This concerns primarily two things:
*We have different '''character professionals categories''' for them, despite the aforementioned similarities that make these characters effectively palette swaps. We don't have different categories for each Koopaling and in practice they are no less different than Peach and Daisy. The proposed change here is to merge the categories, like for example, "Category:Peach and Daisy professionals (SSBU)". The macro categories (like [[:Category:Daisy players]] would stay separate as a form of future proofing for potential declonings.
*Each fighter page has its own '''Attributes''' and '''In competitive play''' sections, which are effectively duplicated efforts as the characters play completely identically. These sections also tend to contain misleading claims as a result of considering the characters as fully separate entities. For example, the Richter page repeatedly claims that he has greater tournament representation than Simon; while this might be true, it is misleading because it could be interpreted as Richter being more viable (similarly to Lucina compared to Marth) whereas it is instead a result of a purely aesthetic preference. Similarly, the Daisy page claims that Umeki is the best Daisy player in the world, however since Daisy is fully identical to Peach this is also a misleading claim as simply preferring Daisy over Peach aesthetically does not make him better than Samsora at using the Peach/Daisy "metacharacter" (I don't wish to discuss if Samsora is actually better than Umeki, just going from general consensus). The idea here is to keep the long metagame writeups only on the parent character page, and to consider them as a single entity for the purposes of determining how much they are represented in tournaments or who is the best player.
This proposal would not extend to Smasher infoboxes, which can list only the preferred character (although they will be placed in the merged category), and might be not necessary to extend to the list of notable players on each page. It also would not extend to anything non-competitive (Classic Mode, spirits), or to any clone characters not listed here as they all have noticeable differences to various extents.
Thank you for your time --[[User:Rdrfc|Rdrfc]] ([[User talk:Rdrfc|talk]]) 14:41, March 19, 2021 (EDT)
:As I explained on Discord, I '''heavily oppose''' this. While obviously mention can be made of the fact that certain clone pairs are nearly interchangeable at a competitive level, I feel it's misleading and inappropriate to lump them together into a single category. I recently added cross-linking between the relevant categories so that anyone who wants to see, say, Peach players can also easily navigate to Daisy players who play a functionally similar character, which in my mind accomplishes the same goal in a way that doesn't mislead about who plays who. Some players exclusively play one of a pair and it's important to make that distinction using separate categories. If somebody plays both Peach and Daisy at a high level, there's no harm in having them in both categories. I think a similar bit of cross-linking could be done between the competitive article sections on the relevant Character (SSBU) pages. [[User:Miles of SmashWiki|<font color="dodgerblue"><span style="font-family:Verdana;">'''Miles''']] <font color="silver">([[User talk:Miles of SmashWiki|<font color="silver">talk]])</font></font></span></font> 14:59, March 19, 2021 (EDT)
:'''Support''', the arguments against this have been based on poor slippery slope arguments (e.g. "what's to stop us from merging the other echoes?!"), or nonsense sentimental arguments that are just as applicable to the alt-skin characters (it's just as "misleading" to call a "Daisy player" a Peach player as it would be to call an "Alex player" a Steve player). Merge what is practically duplicate categories/content and stop putting up the charade of these echoes being separate metagame entities. <span style="font-family:Edwardian Script ITC; font-size:12pt">[[User:Omega Tyrant|<span style="color:forestgreen">Omega</span>]] [[User talk:Omega Tyrant|<span style="color:forestgreen">Tyrant</span>]]</span> [[Image: TyranitarMS.png ]] 15:14, March 19, 2021 (EDT)
::Is directly stating that one character has more representation due to aesthetic differences fair in these cases? I added these statements to Richter and Daisy's pages, but the edits were reverted. [[Special:Contributions/72.219.72.215|72.219.72.215]] 17:23, March 19, 2021 (EDT)
== Arrows to event pages  ==
I I think on event match pages there should be arrows to go to the next event match. This simple change is needed. <small>—Preceding unsigned comment added by [[User:Bamtheman|Bamtheman]] ([[User talk:Bamtheman|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Bamtheman|contribs]]) 19:25, March 19, 2021</small>
== Cross-Over Material  ==
For a long time we had the Trivia pages for characters to include Cross-Over Material outside of ''Smash''. Like other characters crossing paths in other games, like Rex's outfit in ''Breath of the Wild'', ''LoZ'' pictures in ''No Man Sky'', or Link, ''Animal Crossing'', and Inklings in ''Mario Kart''. Recently, it had been deemed "trivial" to include this as it is not directly related to ''Smash''. Would it be possible to have a page that lists Cross-Over Material related to characters that appear in ''Smash''? [[User:Wolff|&#32;Wolff]] ([[User talk:Wolff|talk]]) 01:49, July 2, 2021 (EDT)
:There's a frankly ludicrous quantity of it at this point, and I doubt it'd be a worthwhile mainspace page given how de-valued the uniqueness of it is at this point. [[User:Miles of SmashWiki|<font color="dodgerblue"><span style="font-family:Verdana;">'''Miles''']] <font color="silver">([[User talk:Miles of SmashWiki|<font color="silver">talk]])</font></font></span></font> 01:55, July 2, 2021 (EDT)
::I have to fully agree with Miles. I feel this idea would be better off as a userspace page if people really want to know about other crossovers that certain pairs of characters have appeared in (such as Ryu and Kazuya in ''Street Fighter X Tekken'' or the former two plus Chrom and Lucina in ''Project X Zone 2''). [[File:JacketTerraSig1.png|20px]]'''The [[User:JacketedTerrapin|<span style="color: blue;">Jacketed</span>]] [[User talk:JacketedTerrapin|<span style="color: green;">Terrapin</span>]]'''[[File:JacketTerraSig2.png|20px]] 02:00, July 2, 2021 (EDT)
:::Even if the material was limited to just physical or playable appearances? [[User:Wolff|&#32;Wolff]] ([[User talk:Wolff|talk]]) 02:10, July 2, 2021 (EDT)
::::There's a reason the overabundance trivia guideline exists. With the growing quantity of cross over material appearing, it's uniqueness value continues to drop more than it already has. [[File:Toad.png|20px]] '''[[User:Omega Toad|<font color="deepskyblue">Omega Toad,</font>]] [[User talk:Omega Toad|<font color="blue">the Toad Warrior.</font>]] [[Special:Contributions/Omega Toad|<font color="#7B5BEE">(I'm the best!)</font>]]''' 02:17, July 2, 2021 (EDT)
:::::That's why I was suggesting the cross-over material to be it's own page entirely and possibly limiting it to physical cameos and/or probably just playable appearances. (''Mario Kart'', ''Project X Zone'', ''Street Fighter X Tekken'') But if it's not considered notable enough to do so, then oh well. [[User:Wolff|&#32;Wolff]] ([[User talk:Wolff|talk]]) 02:22, July 2, 2021 (EDT)
::::::If you really want to list these crossovers, then putting it in a userpage is good enough. I don't think it'll be worthwhile to put it in a mainspace article at this point, it's all too trivial. [[File:Toad.png|20px]] '''[[User:Omega Toad|<font color="deepskyblue">Omega Toad,</font>]] [[User talk:Omega Toad|<font color="blue">the Toad Warrior.</font>]] [[Special:Contributions/Omega Toad|<font color="#7B5BEE">(I'm the best!)</font>]]''' 02:31, July 2, 2021 (EDT)
== Playable Characters or Fighters ==
Considering we changed the name from "Playable Characters" to "Fighters" in navigation, should we also change it to "Fighter" in the character pages, or leave it as "Playable Character? [[User:Wolff|&#32;Wolff]] ([[User talk:Wolff|talk]]) 15:13, July 4, 2021 (EDT)
:IMHO it should be "Fighters" everywhere, because playable characters aren't necessarily fighters. In Ultimate, Master Hand is a playable character while not being a fighter (at the end of WoL). Pre-Ultimate, some final smashes technically qualify as playable characters. In fact, it should even be "Playable Fighters" because some characters also qualify as fighters while not being playable (like Metal Mario and the Polygons). [[User:YoshiRyu|YoshiRyu]] ([[User talk:YoshiRyu|talk]]) 02:27, July 5, 2021 (EDT)
==Roles in Smash==
For quite some time, I had seen inconsistencies regarding trophies with character appearances, having been listed as "Trophy Information", "Trophy Descriptions", "As a Trophy", or simply "Trophy". Sometimes a combination of them in the same page. Since most had used just "Trophy", I would change others to match if I were to see one of the others. However, it got me thinking. Stickers and Spirits are also simply listed as such, like with Trophy, do other appearances ''need'' to be listed "as a"?
Take Charizard for example: They've appeared as a Poke Ball Pokemon, a trophy, sticker, a Fighter, and a Spirit. Do we really need to list "As a" for each of it's appearances in ''Smash'', or can we just say the name of the type of appearance? I ''could'' see "As a Fighter" being an exception.
As a:
•As a Playable Character
•As an Assist Character
•As a Background Character
•As a Stage Hazard
•As a Taunt
•As an Item
•As an Assist Trophy
•As an PokeBall Pokémon
•As a Trophy
•As a Spirit
By itself:
•Playable Character
•Assist Character
•Background Character
•Stage Hazard
•Taunt
•Item
•Assist Trophy
•PokeBall Pokémon
•Trophy
•Spirit
Some descriptions sometimes say, "Character appears as a (insert here)" afterwards, explaining it in further detail which makes the former titling seem a tad redundant to me. It also kind of bloats the Contents box a bit to me if the page is long enough for it. [[User:Wolff|&#32;Wolff]] ([[User talk:Wolff|talk]]) 15:13, July 4, 2021 (EDT)
== Favour "rapid jab" over "neutral infinite" ==
For some time, many pages have been referring to rapid jabs as neutral infinites, despite rapid jab being the more common term, and neither term being official (as the official term is flurry attack), leaving no real reason to use neutral infinite over the more familiar (and arguably less misleading) rapid jab. This would extend to rapid jab finishers as well (officially known as flurry attack to KO), rather than neutral infinite finisher. ''[[User:Alex the weeb|<span style="color: blue;">'''Alex'''</span>]] the [[User talk:Alex the weeb|<span style="color: red;">'''Weeb'''</span>]]'' 16:43, September 9, 2021 (EDT)
:Bump. ''[[User:Alex the weeb|<span style="color: blue;">'''Alex'''</span>]] the [[User talk:Alex the weeb|<span style="color: red;">'''Weeb'''</span>]]'' 11:18, September 18, 2021 (EDT)
== Making "changes from" sections on the moveset articles for Mii Swordsman and Gunner ==
Specifically for the moves Hero's Spin, Charge Shot, Gunner Missile, Echo Reflector and Absorbing Vortex. There are some other more borderline moves like Reversal Slash and Gale Stab, but these are the ones that are so similar to the originals that they can be considered truly cloned, and for which I think it would be useful to list the changes.
The idea is that on moveset articles, such as [[Mii Gunner (SSBU)/Neutral special/Default]], there would be a "changes from" section, in this case "Changes from Samus' Charge Shot", which lists specifically how they differ, in the same way "changes from" sections for clones work. I'm made a changelog for these moves already [[User:Alex the weeb/Mii Fighter cloned moves changelog|here]], so it wouldn't require much work to implement. Thoughts? ''[[User:Alex the weeb|<span style="color: blue;">'''Alex'''</span>]] the [[User talk:Alex the weeb|<span style="color: red;">'''Weeb'''</span>]]'' 20:23, March 5, 2022 (EST)
:Reversal Slash is almost identical to Cape in terms of data and only really differs in animation, so it's worth including. I'm all for that addition, but I do think the moveset pages are a bit too obscure still. It would be nice to include it on the Miis' main articles somehow. Also, Mii Gunner's Charge Shot clone is called Charge Blast, not Charge Shot.  [[User:Zeckemyro|Hitbox Enthusiast Zeck]] ([[User talk:Zeckemyro|talk]]) 22:03, March 5, 2022 (EST)
::It's harder to justify making such a section for Reversal Slash in my opinion, since while functionally they are the same, the moves look very different. It would be like calling all swordsman counters cloned from Marth, because they all function in the same way, when their similarity is due to them being the same class of move. If this gets more support, I'll probably do a separate proposal for Reversal Slash. As for where to put them, I'm not really sure how to go about putting them on the character articles without their inclusion feeling unnatural. That said, if you have any suggestions, please do post them. ''[[User:Alex the weeb|<span style="color: blue;">'''Alex'''</span>]] the [[User talk:Alex the weeb|<span style="color: red;">'''Weeb'''</span>]]'' 12:00, March 6, 2022 (EST)
Bump. ''[[User:Alex the weeb|<span style="color: blue;">'''Alex'''</span>]] the [[User talk:Alex the weeb|<span style="color: red;">'''Weeb'''</span>]]'' 11:53, April 2, 2022 (EDT)
:Bumping this again, would like to get at least 1 other user's support before doing this. ''[[User:Alex the weeb|<span style="color: blue;">'''Alex'''</span>]] the [[User talk:Alex the weeb|<span style="color: red;">'''Weeb'''</span>]]'' 11:56, May 11, 2022 (EDT)
::'''Support''', this is worth including because most of these such moves, especially the Miis', are nearly identical in terms of data. I'm a tad split on the animation aspect because of counters, but I think you could justify making such a section for Reversal Slash specifically given how there's functionally close to zero difference between it and the original move. '''Your Senpai,''' [[User:Iron Warrior|<span style="color: red;">'''Iron'''</span>]] [[User talk:Iron Warrior|<span style="color: cyan;">'''Warrior'''</span>]] 13:22, May 11, 2022 (EDT)
== "Other languages" expandable tags for extended content ==
I've noticed that people are starting to add more sections on ''Ultimate'' content in other languages, most notably victory quotes (along with the crowd cheers, which have been there for a while). I'd like to propose a style for this, partly because this is an English-language wiki, but also to follow a similar template to MarioWiki and Bulbapedia and to allow for the inclusion of even more foreign language content for the curious without cluttering up the page. Would anyone be in favor of reformatting said content into expandable/collapsible tags? It'll clutter up the page a bit less while prioritizing the English- and Japanese- language content, but following this style we can also easily include things such as foreign-language reveal trailers.
For example, [[Sonic (SSBU)#Taunts|Sonic's taunt section]] could be reformatted as follows:
===[[Taunt]]s===
*'''Up taunt''': Somersaults and then crosses his arms with his index finger pointing out, one of his signature poses (most notably from ''Sonic Adventure''), while making a "tsk" sound three times.
*'''Side taunt''': Performs the Super Peel Out, a technique that debuted in ''Sonic the Hedgehog CD'', while grinning and saying "Sonic Speed!" ("{{ja|遅すぎだぜ!|Oso sugi da ze!}}", ''You're too slow!'')
*'''Down taunt''': Performs the {{iw|wikipedia|windmill|b-boy move}}, a breakdancing move, while saying "Come on!" ("Come on!").
<gallery>
SSBUSonicTaunt1.gif|Sonic's up taunt.
SSBUSonicTaunt2.gif|Sonic's side taunt.
SSBUSonicTaunt3.gif|Sonic's down taunt.
</gallery>
{|class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed wikitable"
|+ style="white-space:nowrap; border:1px solid; padding:3px;" |'''Taunt quotes in other languages:'''
! !! Side !! Down
|-
! scope="row"|French
|"Vitesse Sonic !"<br>(''Sonic Speed!'') || "Allez !"<br>(''Come on!'', lit. ''Go!'')
|-
! scope="row"|Italian
|"Velocità supersonica!" || "Andiamo!"
|-
! scope="row"|German
|"Lichtgeschwindigkeit!" || "Los geht's!"
|-
! scope="row"|Spanish
|"¡Velocidad sónica!" || "¡Vamos!"
|}
This format makes it clearer which taunts are voiced and which are not, for example. Likewise, we can do tabbed display widgets for videos and other reveal trailers to showcase them in different languages, like with fighter renders for alternate costumes. What do you all think?--[[User:Darthrai|Darthrai]] ([[User talk:Darthrai|talk]]) 14:18, March 12, 2022 (EST)
::I think your arguments might be more convincing if you did some cocaine before posting. Right now it’s just a lot of text without anything funny. Make some typos, say random things in the middle. Do anything to make me want to read. Facts and logic are boring. Do more drugs. [[Special:Contributions/174.204.13.216|174.204.13.216]] 14:03, April 19, 2022 (EDT)

Please note that all contributions to SmashWiki are considered to be released under the Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported license (see SmashWiki:Copyrights for details). Your changes will be visible immediately. Please enter a summary of your changes above.

Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!

Cancel Editing help (opens in new window)