Talk:Ganondorf (PM)

Reverse Sword Taunt?

Can that thing be reversed or no? Shadow (talk) 05:10, 3 April 2015 (EDT)

I don't think it can. John (talk) 10:55, 3 April 2015 (EDT)

Hate to burst your bubble, Shadow, but it can't. - Drilly Dilly (talk) 00:03, 25 August 2015 (EDT)

About the Attributes section...

In order to avoid an edit conflict, I am bringing this to the talk page. I was editing the section in question in order to remove redundancy, unnecessary information, awkward wording, and bias. My changes can be seen here. As you can see, I cut the opening paragraph in half, because I feel that the information in the paragraph can be explained with less words and without redundancy. I feel the part about Fox and Falco, while obviously true, does not need to be here because it is not relevant to Ganondorf. The last sentence reflects bias, and is also unnecessary, since any character can potentially dominate when pushed to the limits.

In the second paragraph, I changed "within the cast" to "in Project M", since I think that sounds better. However, my friend pointed out that any version of the phrase could be dropped since we already know that this is Project M, and I now agree with him on that point.

Later on in my edit, I realized the word "despite" was being used too much in the section and looked for places where I could replace the word.

Finally, I realized that the last paragraph of the section could be merged with a part from the "Changes from Melee to Project M section, in order to avoid redundancy.

My edit was reverted and changed back to the way it mostly was, and I'm not exactly sure why. I ask that you do not think of this as a "my edit VS. that edit" kind of a situation. I don't care that it's "my version" of the section. I do, however, care that the version displayed is as encyclopedic as possible. I am aware that people will eventually make improvements to the changes that I made, because that's what we do in wikis - improve on other peoples' work. John PK SMAAAASH!! 10:30, 3 November 2015 (EST)

The main issue here (not referring to you, John) is adhering to SW:TONE. SmashWiki is an encyclopedia, and therefore should be treated as such, which includes its content. To use an example from SW:TONE itself:

Something not to use:

"To further compound this, Bowser has possibly the worst set of rolls in the game; while most fighters have rolls that excel in speed/distance to make up for the lack of the other, Bowser has no such advantage, having rolls that travel minimal distance without having low endlag or a short duration to compensate."

Something to use:

"Bowser's rolls are less useful than those of other characters, as they give Bowser less distance across the ground than other characters, without having lower endlag or a shorter duration to compensate."

If we can all work towards this, then there wouldn't be any problems. Aidan, the Wandering Space Warrior 10:41, 3 November 2015 (EST)

You are correct that tone is the main issue here and that it is something we all need to work towards. In the past I'm sure I've contributed to the problem. However, another issue is that things can be worded better to be easier to read and shorter without losing meaning. Both of these issues need to be resolved to fix this situation. John PK SMAAAASH!! 18:44, 3 November 2015 (EST)