| Latest revision |
Your text |
| Line 77: |
Line 77: |
| <br> | | <br> |
| Now, on the topic at hand, I propose the idea of instead moving the others that are inconsistent with Shin Shoryuken (Burning Knuckle, Egg Firing, and any other future possibilities) to have both names in the title, as both moves are significant, and I will immediately clarify, again, that moves like Heel Slide and Gun do not hold any significant changes to lead to anything other than a mention on the page. [[User:Aidanzapunk|<span style="color: blue;">'''Aidan'''</span>]], [[User talk:Aidanzapunk|<span style="color: blue;">'''the Rurouni'''</span>]] 15:49, May 16, 2020 (EDT) | | Now, on the topic at hand, I propose the idea of instead moving the others that are inconsistent with Shin Shoryuken (Burning Knuckle, Egg Firing, and any other future possibilities) to have both names in the title, as both moves are significant, and I will immediately clarify, again, that moves like Heel Slide and Gun do not hold any significant changes to lead to anything other than a mention on the page. [[User:Aidanzapunk|<span style="color: blue;">'''Aidan'''</span>]], [[User talk:Aidanzapunk|<span style="color: blue;">'''the Rurouni'''</span>]] 15:49, May 16, 2020 (EDT) |
| :The reason the IP is seeing it is because, as shown in [[Special:Diff/1349100|his edits]], he's using the [[MediaWiki:Mobile.css|mobile CSS]], which doesn't have that snippet at all, and consequently [https://i.imgur.com/AazWopI.png shows the title as a subpage]. [[File:NokiiSig.png|link=User_talk:Nokii]] '''[[User:Nokii|<span style="color:#89f">Nokii</span>]]''' — 16:06, May 16, 2020 (EDT)
| |
|
| |
| I '''Support''' as shown above.[[User:S3AHAWK|<span style="font-family: Arial;color:Blue;">S3AHAWK</span>]][[File:S3AHAWK_Signature_icon_1.png|20px]][[File:S3AHAWK_signature_icon_2.png|20px]] ([[User talk:S3AHAWK|''<span style="color: Red;">talk</span>'']]) 15:55, May 16, 2020 (EDT)
| |
|
| |
| I concur with SonDaniel and agree with Aidan about renaming all the aformentioned moves: I don't really like the idea of shortening the names for the sake of making things "manageable" and "accessible". It's already clunky as is having to deal with moves that are actually two moves, and not conveying this in the page title is in my opinion a huge loss. Not to mention that there is technically no getting around emphasizing one move over the other since one has to be typed out first (this is obviously silly). Now perhaps that might change if in the future if we start getting commands that are actually seven or eight moves or some shit (Command Selection doesn't count), but I think at that point the devs might conjure up a better solution. - [[User:EndGenuity|EndGenuity]] ([[User talk:EndGenuity|talk]]) 16:00, May 16, 2020 (EDT)
| |
|
| |
| I '''support''' that we move all the other moves that are actually two moves. [[User:Awesomelink234|<span style="font-size:10pt;background:#00FF20;border:outset #083 2px;padding:1px 3px;color:#050DF7">Awesomelink234, the Super Cool Gamer</span>]] ([[User talk:Awesomelink234|talk]]) 16:10, May 16, 2020 (EDT)
| |
|
| |
| ::''But then is Egg Firing belittling Breegull Blaster? And what about Burning Knuckle and Crack Shoot?'' Well, in some ways, yes.
| |
| ::''It isn't a matter of one move being "superior" or "more significant" than the other.'' It kinda does matter, because including the other special move in the name could make the article more interesting to our readers. You don't see that a character has two different side special moves (someone like Terry) every reveal, right?
| |
| ::For the rest of your comment: I understand where you see the emphasis. You may have thought of including the other version in the same name as redundant. But like EndGenuity said, "I don't really like the idea of shortening the names for the sake of making things "manageable" and "accessible". It's already clunky as is having to deal with moves that are actually two moves, and not conveying this in the page title is in my opinion a huge loss." And like I wrote, I'm neutral. I'm not trying to oppose you, I am simply telling you what I'm thinking. I am not saying I oppose the move. I apologize if you feel that I was opposing you. Like all opinions with good reasoning, I respect yours. [[User:Son Daniel|<span style="font-family: Arial;color:red;">SonDaniel</span>]][[File:SonDanielSignatureHead1.png|20px]][[File:SonDanielSignatureHead2.png|20px]] ([[User talk:Son Daniel|talk page]]) 16:31, May 16, 2020 (EDT)
| |
| :::No worries brogod, you're good. The more I hear both sides of this discussion, the more I start to feel that either choice of nomenclature has its pros and cons. I think that I'm honestly feeling a bit more '''neutral''' than before on the whole matter: I'll roll with whichever choice is determined by consensus. [[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]] 21:38, May 16, 2020 (EDT)
| |
| ::::Sure! As for me, I’m more to opposing it now. (By the way, what’s brogod?) [[User:Son Daniel|<span style="font-family: Arial;color:red;">SonDaniel</span>]][[File:SonDanielSignatureHead1.png|20px]][[File:SonDanielSignatureHead2.png|20px]] ([[User talk:Son Daniel|talk page]]) 22:46, May 16, 2020 (EDT)
| |
| :::::For legal reasons I cannot elaborate, brogod. [[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]] 23:24, May 16, 2020 (EDT)
| |
| (Indent restarted) Alright, brogod! [[User:Son Daniel|<span style="font-family: Arial;color:red;">SonDaniel</span>]][[File:SonDanielSignatureHead1.png|20px]][[File:SonDanielSignatureHead2.png|20px]] ([[User talk:Son Daniel|talk page]]) 23:54, May 16, 2020 (EDT)
| |
|
| |
| Bumping this, because if this discussion does continue its trend in the opposite direction it implicates changes for multiple other articles. It's also comparable to a proposal because it'll change how we do things for future move articles.
| |
| :I think I figured out a solution on which articles to name Move A/Move B. Essentially, the only ones that ''maybe'' should stay unchanged are Hero's specials, as they are nothing more than charge differences not all that different from Robin's neutral special. The rest should be renamed to be more similar to this page, rather than splitting it or naming the page after the first one. [[Special:Contributions/72.219.72.215|72.219.72.215]] 08:38, June 12, 2020 (EDT)
| |
|
| |
| '''Bumping again.''' At this point, I feel as if it isn't worth it to move or split this article. Each double-move's name format is its own independent case, and I feel that this article's name should '''not be changed.''' The official name for this final smash incorporates both variations, and we have redirects for both variants to this article so searching for either one is simple. Furthermore, this article is not particularly crowded, so it can feasibly left as an article for both without splitting them apart. We should not be looking to move this article, or Shinryuken's article, for the sake of consistency with the other double-moves - the merit of moving those articles should be discussed independently, and as things stand I don't see much merit in moving this one. I'd like to see more editors revisit this discussion before we can close it and remove its move + split tags. [[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]] 16:15, June 19, 2020 (EDT)
| |
| :Since a handful of other doublemove articles are now being moved to match this article's name format, if the discussion about what to do here doesn't progress soon, I'm just going to remove the move + split tags because at that point the article should just be left as is. [[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]] 15:07, July 10, 2020 (EDT)
| |
|
| |
| ==Split...?==
| |
| Okay, what exactly are we doing with this article? [[User:Son Daniel|<span style="font-family: Arial;color:red;">SonDaniel</span>]][[File:SonDanielSignatureHead1.png|20px]][[File:SonDanielSignatureHead2.png|20px]] ([[User talk:Son Daniel|talk page]]) 15:31, May 26, 2020 (EDT)
| |
| :Hold on, hold on, I don't think we ever agreed to split this in our previous discussion. We went from deciding to move this to a single-name format, to moving all other double-move articles to a double-name format, but we never mentioned anything about splitting them into different articles. The previous discussion became convoluted enough with time. Whatever decision we're advocating for should be decided on and then, in my opinion, put to vote as a '''general proposal.''' As far as I know, we are choosing between double-name format for other double-move articles or single-name format for this article and Ken's final smash, and we were collectively leaning towards the former? [[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]] 17:37, May 26, 2020 (EDT)
| |
| ::I’m just not sure why this was proposed. [[User:Son Daniel|<span style="font-family: Arial;color:red;">SonDaniel</span>]][[File:SonDanielSignatureHead1.png|20px]][[File:SonDanielSignatureHead2.png|20px]] ([[User talk:Son Daniel|talk page]]) 19:46, May 26, 2020 (EDT)
| |
| :::Me neither, we never discussed splitting the articles. I'm going to go ahead and remove the tag for now. [[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]] 23:01, May 26, 2020 (EDT)
| |
| :::Afterword: I'm going to actually leave it up for now, even though I'll edit it to remove mention of the talk page... as our discussion here is not about splitting it just yet. [[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]] 00:57, May 27, 2020 (EDT)
| |
| ::::I am the one who originally added the tag. I admittedly may have misread some of the arguments above, but I still stand that splitting the page is worth discussing. --[[User:Rdrfc|Rdrfc]] ([[User talk:Rdrfc|talk]]) 11:52, May 27, 2020 (EDT)
| |
| :::::This is why I think that we need to bring this whole discussion to to a general proposal. We've got a few different courses of action here. If we move everything to a double-name format, then there's no point in splitting this and Ken's articles up. It only becomes feasible as another way of adopting single-name format. [[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]] 12:38, May 27, 2020 (EDT)
| |
|
| |
| I would much rather just rename other pages according to this one and find a way to get rid of the redirect at the top of the page for mobile (I know now that it's coded not to show up on desktop) than split it. Otherwise, that'll be another argument in itself with much more obvious results. [[Special:Contributions/72.219.72.215|72.219.72.215]] 02:12, June 2, 2020 (EDT)
| |
|
| |
| ::I think we should split this article and other Special Moves that have two different moves. [[User:SeanWheeler|SeanWheeler]] ([[User talk:SeanWheeler|talk]]) 21:39, June 25, 2020 (EDT)
| |
Log in
