Talk:List of Director's Room Miiverse posts/Archive 2

This page is an archive. Do not edit the contents of this page. Direct any additional comments to the current talk page.

Regarding speculation

This isn't so much a proper mainspace article, as it is just an archive of Sakurai's posts, we don't need to be absolutely anal here about no speculation. Reporting common speculation on what Sakurai's often vague posts mean is fine and helps makes this archive more interesting and informative, while also giving us a written record of what people thought at the time, to compare to what actually happened in the final game.

This is even backed by our no speculation policy, which states "there is a certain amount of tolerance for reporting speculation that is widespread throughout the Smash Bros. community (such as documenting the most well-known rumours)".

Of course we won't just allow random users to add their own personal speculation that no one else believes (such as saying Skull Kid may attack with a tantrum). And it'll always be made clear when something is fan speculation and when something is pure fact. Omega Tyrant 22:38, 28 February 2014 (EST)

It doesn't belong here. The policy also says "This policy strictly applies to articles about content from unreleased games", which is exactly what this is about. The notes column should focus strictly on what is confirmed from Sakurai's posts, not what is speculated as a result of them. Miles (talk) 22:48, 28 February 2014 (EST)

Yes it does here, actually read what I wrote. Omega Tyrant 22:50, 28 February 2014 (EST)

This is an archive of confirmed statements. That is all that belongs here. I fail to see how that's unclear. Miles (talk) 22:55, 28 February 2014 (EST)

"This isn't so much a proper mainspace article, as it is just an archive of Sakurai's posts, we don't need to be absolutely anal here about no speculation. Reporting common speculation on what Sakurai's often vague posts mean is fine and helps makes this archive more interesting and informative, while also giving us a written record of what people thought at the time, to compare to what actually happened in the final game."

This was not refuted. This is an archive of Sakurai's posts and what they or what people think they could mean, not of "confirmed statements"; we have that already in the mainspace articles. Reporting on what people think Sakurai's posts means is absolutely needed. Trying to be 100% anal about speculation and treating this as a normal mainspace article makes it a hell of a lot less interesting and informative, and especially weakens it's capability to be interesting down the line after the game is released. Omega Tyrant 23:04, 28 February 2014 (EST)

This is a timeline of what Sakurai said and when; what makes you think it's not "a proper mainspace article"? And this is not, nor should it be, an archive of "what people think they could mean". That's a kind of speculation that has no place in the wiki's mainspace, period. Miles (talk) 23:11, 28 February 2014 (EST)

"This is a timeline of what Sakurai said and when"

And it's additionally a timeline to show what people thought Sakurai's often vague statements mean (which you know, causes a lot of fucking rumors, which this wiki explicitly covers as stated even in the speculation policy). If people want a bland archive of just "Sakurai said X", they can find that on other sites already. If people want to see what Sakurai's posts mean or potentially hint at, then this archive will be informative to them.

"what makes you think it's not "a proper mainspace article"?"

It's an archive of Sakurai posts and a time capsule of sorts. It's a special type of article that's more of a Wiki project, and doesn't have to adhere to standard Wiki procedure. Don't treat it like it's a bog standard mainspace article.

"And this is not, nor should it be, an archive of "what people think they could mean". That's a kind of speculation that has no place in the wiki's mainspace, period."

Stop being so fucking anal and actually read what I said. I already refuted this, and you just ignore each of the points while just shouting "NO SPECULATION!". That is not a refute.Omega Tyrant 23:22, 28 February 2014 (EST)

"It's a special type of article that doesn't have to adhere to standard Wiki procedure. Don't treat it like it's a bog standard mainspace article."

Do you have any justification for this statement, or are you just inventing it out of nowhere? There's a standard set of expectations for mainspace articles, and you're claiming this as an exception without any sort of valid reasoning. This is "List of Director's Room Miiverse posts", not "List of Director's Room Miiverse posts with fan reactions". I wouldn't consider it "anal" to hold a mainspace page to the standard for mainspace pages. Miles (talk) 23:31, 28 February 2014 (EST)

"and you're claiming this as an exception without any sort of valid reasoning."

You're just being dense now, you are just going to completely ignored everything I said? I already explained how it adds to the article, while you just kept going "NO SPECULATION!". I additionally already pointed out how our own speculation policy that you keep trumpeting makes provisions for allowing the mention of notable rumors and speculation, which certainly fall in that line here. You're the one with no valid reasoning here.

And it's an archive of Sakurai's posts and what they could entail, not an article. The mainspace is just where it's convenient to put it. Don't treat an archive like it's a bog standard mainspace article. Omega Tyrant 23:40, 28 February 2014 (EST)

Not that I disagree with minor speculation here (though less than what the previous revert had), but how is an archive of posts not an article? It's not really much different from the Brawl version, and that's pretty much an article. Toomai Glittershine The Cloronic 23:46, 28 February 2014 (EST)

I view the Dojo archive the same way, it's just in a less organised manner. Also, the Dojo archive reported on some speculation relevant to Sakurai's updates. Omega Tyrant 23:54, 28 February 2014 (EST)

Miles, do not revert if you're not going to bother responding here, and don't especially claim the other side "failed to defend their point" when you don't even bother responding and another significant user posted agreeing with the other side's main point. That is some blatant bullshit right there. Omega Tyrant 07:11, 1 March 2014 (EST)

He disagreed with your main point, which claimed that this page was an exception to mainspace article standards, and you have continued to provide zero justification for that claim. You are the only one claiming this page as an exception to our accepted standards, and therefore the burden of justification is on you. Miles (talk) 14:15, 1 March 2014 (EST)

"Not that I disagree with minor speculation here"

What is this whole thing over? The reporting of common speculation. That's the main point. And zero justification?

"Reporting common speculation on what Sakurai's often vague posts mean is fine and helps makes this archive more interesting and informative, while also giving us a written record of what people thought at the time, to compare to what actually happened in the final game."

"This is even backed by our no speculation policy, which states "there is a certain amount of tolerance for reporting speculation that is widespread throughout the Smash Bros. community (such as documenting the most well-known rumours)"."

"This is an archive of Sakurai's posts and what they or what people think they could mean, not of "confirmed statements"; we have that already in the mainspace articles."

"Reporting on what people think Sakurai's posts means is absolutely needed. Trying to be 100% anal about speculation and treating this as a normal mainspace article makes it a hell of a lot less interesting and informative, and especially weakens it's capability to be interesting down the line after the game is released."

"And it's additionally a timeline to show what people thought Sakurai's often vague statements mean (which you know, causes a lot of fucking rumors, which this wiki explicitly covers as stated even in the speculation policy). If people want a bland archive of just "Sakurai said X", they can find that on other sites already. If people want to see what Sakurai's posts mean or potentially hint at, then this archive will be informative to them."

"It's an archive of Sakurai posts and a time capsule of sorts. It's a special type of article that's more of a Wiki project"

"I additionally already pointed out how our own speculation policy that you keep trumpeting makes provisions for allowing the mention of notable rumors and speculation, which certainly fall in that line here"

Fucking seriously dude? Are you that fucking dense? I got all this here, and you're just gonna keep going "LOL you have provided zero justification no defense for your point NO SPECULATION!". You're the one here with no fucking argument. You keep parroting " NO SPECULATION!" over and over, initially violate SW:1RV, and then keep reverting and reverting when you don't even bother to respond. And then you have the audacity to claim I "put up no justification", when I typed all this out? This is the type of shit for why I say you're such a terrible admin, and why the majority of other users agree with that sentiment. Step off the fucking high horse, and put up a real argument that isn't a blind stating of Wiki policies you clearly don't grasp. Omega Tyrant 14:36, 1 March 2014 (EST)

• The point of this article is to be informative about what's actually confirmed, and speculation is inappropriate in this context.
• That sentence refers to things like the List of rumors page, not to articles that are supposed to be factual archives. And this article is a factual archive (see Toom's post).
• You're inventing the claim that this article somehow is exempt from the ordinary rules about speculation, and without any valid basis. You are willfully misunderstanding that section of SW:NOT.
• I'm not really in the interest of caring what you think is "a hell of a lot less interesting and informative". It would also be "interesting" to report every bit of fan speculation everywhere. But not beneficial to the functioning of the wiki as a reliable, factual encyclopedia.
• Who cares if it's on other sites already? That's like saying we shouldn't list the DOJO posts because anyone could go read them on their own, but we still list them to give a factual timeline of reveals for Brawl. In this case you need an account, making it doubly important that we stick to the facts to make sure those without access on their own get just the facts.
• "It's a special type of article that's more of a Wiki project" is presented again without justification.
• "I additionally already pointed out how our own speculation policy that you keep trumpeting makes provisions for allowing the mention of notable rumors and speculation, which certainly fall in that line here" Those exceptions are strictly for pages about said subjects, as I mentioned above. Not for pages like this.

Are you satisfied now with a wall of text back? It's getting tiresome to have to explain this to you. And it's not only rude to turn this into an ad hominem style attack, it's also not helping your case. Miles (talk) 14:48, 1 March 2014 (EST)

"The point of this article is to be informative about what's actually confirmed, and speculation is inappropriate in this context."

It is not inappropriate at all, when many of Sakurai's statements have caused speculation that is widespread throughout the community. Reporting that speculation is information, and provides a written record of what people thought at X time to compared to what actually happened in the final game.

"That sentence refers to things like the List of rumors page, not to articles that are supposed to be factual archives. And this article is a factual archive (see Toom's post)."

And what do you fucking know, many of these statements cause rumors. Again, how dense are you? Reporting that stuff is exactly what the sentence refers to.

"You're inventing the claim that this article somehow is exempt from the ordinary rules about speculation, and without any valid basis. You are willfully misunderstanding that section of SW:NOT."

Except I have explained it over and over? Must I copy paste it all down again? Or is that skull of yours just too thick to comprehend? I'm not willfully misunderstanding anything, as already covered above.

"I'm not really in the interest of caring what you think is "a hell of a lot less interesting and informative". It would also be "interesting" to report every bit of fan speculation everywhere. But not beneficial to the functioning of the wiki as a reliable, factual encyclopedia."

Blatant strawman. Did I say anything about "reporting every bit of fan speculation"? What did I actually say in my very first post? Of course we won't just allow random users to add their own personal speculation that no one else believes. We are reporting the common speculation and rumors stemming from Sakurai's posts. When you have a bunch of people going "Ridley!" at the "Smash doesn't stay true to scale" comment, then yes, that is something notable that should be reported. When it's just one user going "Skull Kid may attack with a tantrum", then yes, that shit gets taken down. And there's always a clear distinction on what is speculation and what is confirmed information.

"Who cares if it's on other sites already? That's like saying we shouldn't list the DOJO posts because anyone could go read them on their own, but we still list them to give a factual timeline of reveals for Brawl."

It does matter, because there's no point of doing it if we can't offer anything over them. And those DOJO updates we archived? You know we reported on the common speculation then? And it made it a hell of a lot more interesting to read, knowing what people thought at the time and comparing it to what we known happened.

""It's a special type of article that's more of a Wiki project" is presented again without justification."

Lets see. One, it's an archive for the updates of the new game, and of Sakurai's statements and what they entail, it's not a written article. Two, the archives will not be continually edited and cannot be continually improved, once the final update comes along and we got what we need down, all real editing on the pages will cease. Three, these pages exist within themselves, and won't have use being linked elsewhere on the Wiki beyond the relevanct Miiverse page, serving to time capsule the period before Smash 4's release. You can't just treat this as some bog standard mainspace article, when it has all of these qualities.

"Those exceptions are strictly for pages about said subjects, as I mentioned above. Not for pages like this."

Which, as I pointed out above, is completely relevant to this page.

"It's getting tiresome to have to explain this to you. And it's not only rude to turn this into an ad hominem style attack, it's also not helping your case."

Says the supposed admin who right away violated SW:1RV, reverts while not responding on the talk page, and just brushes off the opposition as "making zero justification". It's not an ad hominem, it's calling you out on your shit. Omega Tyrant 15:18, 1 March 2014 (EST)

It's pointless to argue with someone who clearly has no interest in holding a civil discussion; I've made my points clearly. Continuing to re-add this content is in violation of the wiki's standards and policies. I advise you to talk to Toomai if you want this content that badly, because it is not permissible. Miles (talk) 15:26, 1 March 2014 (EST)

"It's pointless to argue with someone who clearly has no interest in holding a civil discussion"

Again, who violated SW:1RV first? Who reverted without responding? Who kept brushing off the other side as "putting up no argument", even though they have typed like 10K characters on here? Don't tell me that I "have no interest in holding a civil discussion", when you have been a belittling ass the whole time who can't even abide by the Wiki policies they're trying to trump so hard.

"Continuing to re-add this content is in violation of the wiki's standards and policies."

Dude, you reverting me was a violation. Lets see, you remove a bunch of information, I revert, and do you go to the talkpage to "discuss it civilly"? No, you undo the revert. That right there is a blatant violation of SW:1RV. Then, after Toomai's post where he states he didn't disagree with the reporting of certain speculation, you don't respond farther, when you posted on other Wiki pages after. So I then rerevert you as it seems you conceded, and what do you do? Undo the revert yet again, claimed I "made no argument", and still never bothered to respond back on the talk page. Don't you dare throw this "violation of Wiki standards and policies" and "civil discussion" shit in my face when you have blatantly violated them this whole time you hypocrite.

You don't respond back in an hour, you show you have no refute, and have thus conceded. You don't get to go "oh I'm not going to respond to your argument, but don't add it back or that's a violation!". You want to keep this information off so badly? You refute then. Your behavior here is completely impermissible. Omega Tyrant 15:42, 1 March 2014 (EST)

Both of you calm down. All I want is the list to be completed. Maybe you can fill out the June and July sections on Archive 1, and then decide on what you want to do with the speculation. The notes don't have to be filled out, so let's not touch them until we make a decision. By the way, Omega, you just gave me an edit conflict! SeanWheeler (talk) 14:42, 1 March 2014 (EST)

Uh, Miles, you just posted over my previous comment. And Omega, I think I'm starting to side with Miles. Speculation just starts fights like this. SeanWheeler (talk) 14:58, 1 March 2014 (EST)

This needs to be settled, dropping a dispute for something that can be easily done later is completely counterproductive.

"Speculation just starts fights like this."

That's a really shit reason you know and against the spirit of a Wiki. "Oh someone might dispute this, guess we're better off without it regardless of its actual value". That kind of thinking would result in the tier list and all the competitive information being taken down. Actually, pretty much everything on the Wiki would get taken down except for the stuff you find in the instruction manual, if you weren't going to add something because "it could start arguments". Omega Tyrant 15:24, 1 March 2014 (EST)

Yeah I'll just stay out of this until you both agree that the other is correct, because guess what, that's what's up. Toomai Glittershine Le Grand Fromage 15:45, 1 March 2014 (EST)

And I guess by "both of you are correct", I also mean "both of you are in the wrong" (which is also true). But I'll see if you can understand what I mean by that first, since this isn't the first time we've had a Spock vs McCoy argument between you two. Toomai Glittershine The Zesty 16:01, 1 March 2014 (EST)

And the time you wasted arguing could have been used to finish List of Director's Room Miiverse posts/Archive 1. People have different opinions, so just deal with it. Stop fighting and just finish the list! And Omega, this is a mainspace article because the title has no prefix. SeanWheeler (talk) 16:33, 1 March 2014 (EST)

Cut it out with the condensing "time wasting" shit, this is a wiki, and when information is at stake, this is how it goes.

"People have different opinions, so just deal with it."

This isn't an "opinion" issue, information here is at stake. You can't just go "gee golly that's your opinion I guess this doesn't go here".

"Stop fighting and just finish the list!"

You want those mostly meaningless posts up right now? Then fucking do it yourself. This is a Wiki, anyone can edit, including you. Don't yell at other people for disputing information on an article, when you're completely capable of adding it yourself. You're the one here helping with no progress. Stop being a lazy bastard expecting others to do it.

"And Omega, this is a mainspace article because the title has no prefix."

Don't comment if you're not going to bother to read anything that was said.

And Toomai, that post is quite frankly useless, I expected a better mediation post than that. Going "you're both wrong" doesn't help anything, don't start using the golden mean fallacy here. Omega Tyrant 17:13, 1 March 2014 (EST)

I know I can edit articles, but this requires a Miiverse account to enter the Director's Room to get all the links in one go. For people without the Wii U, you would have to do a massive Google search and a lot of work for those links. How about you log out of Miiverse and look at The Director's Room. All you get is a message saying "Welcome to Miiverse. You must sign in to view this page." And Miiverse requires a Wii U to sign up. This has to be completed by a Wii U owner. I don't want to cheat and copy off other fansites. SeanWheeler (talk) 17:36, 1 March 2014 (EST)

"I don't want to cheat and copy off other fansites."

You're copying the same exact post, with the same exact picture, that you would get from Miiverse. Where you copy it from doesn't matter. And if you don't want our archive just being another bland archive of just pics and Sakurai's quotes like those fansites? Well that is exactly what the notes section and reporting of widespread speculation is for. Omega Tyrant 17:45, 1 March 2014 (EST)

Fine, I'll do it. But I won't be leaving the links. The information is going to come from here You should do add the links in for me. And if there is a difference in the text from the original post, I want you to correct it. During the edit, I will upload the files we're missing. SeanWheeler (talk) 18:12, 1 March 2014 (EST)

You want a "better mediation post"? Fine then, here's my opinion of what's gone down.

1. Miles is in the wrong for breaking 1RV and being overbureaucratic and closed-minded in general.
2. OT is in the wrong for also breaking 1RV and for creating a hostile environment with his attitude.
3. I don't care who broke 1RV first.
4. Miles is in the right because this isn't a special article in terms of what standards it should be held to, "factual" is more relevant than "interesting", and a decent amount of the speculation that was in the article originally was indeed a bit overdone.
5. OT is in the right because this article does deserve elaboration beyond the facts due to Sakurai's nebulous wordings and notably-widespread speculation should not be ignored regardless of what page it's on.

So my opinion? Saying "the community reacted in this way" on this page isn't speculation at all - it's fan reaction, which we have everywhere. If Sakurai were to post a picture of a Shadow Ball with a murky caption and the community goes wild because "zomg mew2 comfirmns", we should report that. In that sense I guess I would be considering this as a special page, which I don't really support because then the door's open to have fan reaction on all the SSB4 pages, but in some cases the wiki's goal of providing information overrides some of its policies.

So here's what I'm gonna do. I'll go over the edit with the speculation in it and add back the parts that I think are more fan reaction than speculation, and we'll see what you two think of it. Toomai Glittershine The Glow 23:23, 1 March 2014 (EST)

There, that's a much better post (even if it tries to be too middle groundish). Something should be said about that Waluigi comment, since it's clearly a jab at something. And I found the Skull Kid speculation with the Moon to be notable enough, but eh, that isn't something I'll argue specifically for.

And regarding "hostile attitude", you can't just pin that on me, when Miles brushes me off as "making no argument" when I wrote all this here, and blatantly violates SW:1RV while making not bothering to respond. Additionally, there is a clear difference in the violating of SW:1RV here; there are two blatant times (the first time, which is most major as it already set the whole thing off to a bad tone, and the second time when he already stopped responding on the talkpage) and then yet a third time Miles did it. My third revert can be seen as one, but it's not a blatant violation, when Miles didn't bother to respond on the talk page and again just brushed me off as having "made no argument". So you can't just say "you both violated SW:1RV" like it was an equal offense. Miles has to be called out for that shit. Omega Tyrant 03:04, 2 March 2014 (EST)

Is there no post today or are we slow?

It seems no one has edited this page today. Is it because Sakurai didn't post a new screenshot today? I can't check the official site now, because the school blocked access, so I'd have to wait until I get home to check, and I don't have a Miiverse account so it would be hard to find todays screenshot, so did Sakurai post anything? Or is it the first weekday since Winter Break that Sakurai didn't post anything? SeanWheeler (talk) 09:25, 25 March 2014 (EDT)

So, we posted late today too. Otherwise, how would we know that Lumiose City is now Prism Tower if Sakurai didn't post anything (unless that post wasn't from Miiverse) SeanWheeler (talk) 09:31, 28 March 2014 (EDT)

Possible redirects and links

As of now, this list seems to be a bit difficult to find, as there are relatively few places that link or redirect here. Perhaps redirects such as "Pic of the day" would allow easier navigation to this page. If this is OK, I'll also add a link to and from Super Smash Bros. 4 Official Site. Sorry for being a noob here, but how do make redirects so that they appear in the search bar (i.e. typing in "Pic of the day" will make "Pic of the day" appear, but clicking on it sends you here)? -- Nintendrone42 (talk) 15:17, 17 April 2014 (EDT)

There is some server-side setting to get redirects to appear in the search bar, but I don't know what it is. It's not a bad idea for a redirect though. Toomai Glittershine The Riotous 17:10, 17 April 2014 (EDT)

Oh well, worth a shot. Anyways, I'm guessing it is fine to link to and from this on the Official Website page? It'll make this page a bit simpler to find. Nintendrone42 (talk) 17:20, 17 April 2014 (EDT)

Links added. Now this page should be more accessible to viewers. Nintendrone42 (talk) 20:51, 17 April 2014 (EDT)

Legend

What does the white mean? It's not on the legend. (Also, please add this.) Nutta Butta (talk) 12:54, 14 July 2014 (EDT)

It's not that white means something; it's just blank because it didn't reveal anything new of significance. Miles (talk) 12:55, 14 July 2014 (EDT)

Rayman trophy

Just something that might need to be brought up, but there are two screenshots of the Rayman trophy: the one on Miiverse, and the one posted on official Rayman Facebook timeline.

• Official Rayman image
• Miiverse image

Idk of what significance this is atm, but just something I felt should be mentioned (if not so already). Unknown the Hedgehog 13:58, 16 July 2014 (EDT)

What's odd is the Facebook one seems to have his eyes fully open, while the Miiverse one has them half-closed. Are trophies going to blink, or is one of the two using an out-of-date model? Miles (talk) 14:06, 16 July 2014 (EDT)

I've seen speculation about trophies being animated, which would explain the differences. However, that is purely speculation. Unknown the Hedgehog 14:09, 16 July 2014 (EDT)

I'm pretty sure that's the 3DS version of the trophy. It's a completely different model, and being that Sakurai said that Ubisoft gave them a model to use instead of reference art, there's no reason the model should have an earlier version. ♡FirstaLasto♥ 14:11, 16 July 2014 (EDT)

The Wii U version's trophies appear to have shinier stands than the 3DS trophies (look at Mega Man X's trophy), so I think it's safe to bet that trophies will be animated (or the Rayman image in the first link is beta). blue ninjakoopa 16:09, 16 July 2014 (EDT)

Today's PotD Bug

Would someone please fix the arrangement of today's PotD (8/20/14)? After further analyzation, I can't figure out what the problem is... Aidan the Average Gamer (talk) 11:50, 20 August 2014 (EDT)

What happened is that the ending |} of the table wasn't moved down below the current PotD, so it wasn't recognized as part of the table. Qwerty (talk) 11:56, 20 August 2014 (EDT)

Thank you, that's much better. Aidan the Average Gamer (talk) 11:59, 20 August 2014 (EDT)

9/30 PotD

Someone told me today's PotD only has a comment on Japan's Miiverse...if we translated it, could it go on here? Aidan the Gamer 07:59, 30 September 2014 (EDT)

Jigglypuff in the 11/5 PotD

Would this count as an "official reveal"? I mean, it hasn't been put on the website yet, but since Sakurai just flat-out said Jigglypuff's name and the PotD revealed her directly without censorship, would this count as her official reveal? Rtzxy Reflect!!! 15:11, 5 November 2014 (EST)

...Nah... he did it with Ganondorf too. And he was revealed five days later on the official site. And she was also named in the 50-Fact thing as one of the new defaults, if I recall correctly. ---Preceding unsigned comment added by you. Or maybe Nutta. 15:18, 5 November 2014 (EST)

Now here's the thing: with Ganondorf's PotD, he was only mentioned, and that was very vaguely, as Sakurai could've been talking about a past game (I know he wasn't, but still). With Jigglypuff, she is actually shown, so this wouldn't be considered a "mention", but rather a "reveal". Rtzxy Reflect!!! 15:24, 5 November 2014 (EST)

Actually, since Jigglypuff was revealed today anyways on the official site, ignore all this. This page needs archiving, anyways, which I'll do right now. Rtzxy Reflect!!! 21:33, 5 November 2014 (EST)