Talk:Taunt Match/Archive1

Nonsense?

This article was kept as a result of this deletion discussion. The discussion is now closed. Please preserve this section as an archive of the original discussion and do not edit it. --Kirby King 23:55, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

How is this nonsense? This makes perfect sense, and Taunt Matches do exist. Go onto Wifi with Captain Falcon and use his down Taunt, and people will join, that's a Taunt Match. Cafinator (talk) 02:53, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Well, time to get the bolded letters out.

Keep. Cafinator worked hard on this page, and there are such things as Taunt Matches. I don't understand why they put "Nonsense" as a reason. Taunt Matches are nonsense, I'll admit that, but this article isn't. Cafinator (talk) 02:54, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Keep. ItemHazard (talk) 03:06, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Keep. Taunt Matches are quite common and many people might want to find out information about them. When players go on Basic Brawl and sees players taunting, they might want to find out why the players are taunting. EDIT: I agree with Cafinator, Taunt Matches may seem nonsense, but it's an actual term or event that people do, ergo, a page containing information about it seems useful. Urbzsims (talk) 03:19, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Well, it's unanimous. Keep got the most votes, so there's no need to delete this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cafinator (talk • contribs)

The deletion discussion is still open because (a) it was an hour old before the deletion tag was removed and (b) a sysop hasn't closed it. It would have been nice if the nominator had left a comment explaining the nomination in greater detail, however. --Kirby King 05:04, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Hmph. Well, what are your thoughts on this, then? Cafinator (talk) 05:14, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Undecided: It gets a few hits on Google, but it's for obscure YouTube vids and a forum discussion. If someone can prove that this is gaining popularity, I suppose it can stay. FyreNWater - (Talk • Contributions ) 08:19, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Keep. I see Taunt Matches on Wi-Fi all the time. - Amycats2 (talk) 12:50, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Keep. I've been in like 20 of these on Wi-Fi, with random people. Smorekingxg456 (talk) 13:57, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

For a real player, ending up stuck in a "taunt match" is the most frustrating thing on WiFi and tends to be facilitated by people who can somehow stay easily entertained listening to "Pee-ka-choo-pee-ka-choo" for the duration of an entire match, who then proceed to do it again next round. I don't understand what sort of player enjoys this on a repeat basis, but I can't deny its existence and although it's a facet of play that I have no concept of, I guess it's notable enough for an article. I'll do everything I can to resist putting [[Image:Retard.jpg] at the top. :^) --RJM ^Talk 14:19, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Keep. But real players use the Friend Finder, of course. --Kirby King 17:04, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Randall, you're supposed to vote, not leave your opinion on an article. Oh, that reminds me:

Keep; I don't recall ever being in a taunt match that lasted the whole match, but I do recall people taunting at the beginning of some of my matches. Oh, and Randall, it's, "Pikachu". MarioGalaxy {talk} 17:11, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

This is a talk page for discussion related to the article. The notion that you are supposed to "vote" and then not leave your opinion on the article is ridiculous. A vote counts for nothing if you can't provide a reason for your decision. And remember that this isn't a straight democracy; just because there's ten people saying "Keep" doesn't mean that it won't get deleted based on three people who come to a reasonable conclusion about lack of article notability through discussion. Remember, "having the most votes" and "reaching consensus" are not the same thing. --RJM ^Talk 18:06, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

There's no requirement to vote because deletion discussions aren't a "vote" per se. Still, Randall gave his opinion on whether the article should be kept, so I don't see why you're going out of your way to criticize him. --Kirby King 17:59, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Fine, whatever. But he might as well say Keep or Delete while he's at it. MarioGalaxy {talk} 18:01, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Keep Why was this even put up for deletion? Taunt matches are fun! Cheezperson (speak to the big cheez)

Delete. i agree it is an actual term, but the other person your fighting will just kill you with ease, and the match will go on with you taunting whil the other person kos you. the only way the other person won't fight, is if you two already talked it over before hand JtM =^] (talk) 20:18, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Delete. I go online every day, and the closest I ever got to a "Taunt Match" was merely two unresponsive players. but whether this was intentional or not in unclear. Gargomon251 (talk) 20:28, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Usually, they are planned ahead with friends. Oh, and just because you are annoyed with taunt matches doesn't mean they don't exist. Because these taunt matches exist, it is only fitting that this page stays on the wiki. Cheezperson (speak to the big cheez)

Keep. While personally I dislike these kind of matches, they certainly are a real occurrence.–Entrea Sumatae 21:28, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Keep. Sure, it may not be the most enjoyable type of matches, but it's a common occurence on With Anyone fights and (though less often) With Friends matches. I mean, if you were looking for an actual fair fight, I wouldn't recommend doing a 4-player timed match with items. That's not what you would define as "serious", y'know? Shade (talk) 00:37, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Current count:

Votes: 12

Keep:10 Delete:2

It's very one-sided. So far, the only reasons people have for deleting is, "I never had seen one," and "I don't like them." Oh, and some post I couldn't understand. Either way...Cafinator (talk) 04:18, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Keep. I just had my first match of this kind the other day, and indeed, much of the information in this article was reflected in my experience. I also find it interesting to know that this is, indeed, a documented phenomenon. In any case, such a scenario (when/if encountered) would certainly be pertinent to any player, regardless of their stance.

You lost me after "Keep." Cafinator (talk) 23:53, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Pikachu's taunts

Are Pikachu's taunts often used in taunt matches, because I heard some people who say that Pikachu has the most annoying taunts in the game?142.59.91.42 23:59, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

why would it matter? all taunts are annoying when you do then repeatedly JtM =^] (talk) 00:00, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Not all taunts are annoying. Zelda, Snake, Olimar's taunt aren't really annoying. Urbzsims (talk) 00:20, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

It depends on the person. Generally though, Pikachu, Sonic, and Pit are considered the kings of annoying taunts. Cheezperson (speak to the big cheez)

Yeah, and Olimar's down taunt is the best taunt ever. Shade (talk) 00:37, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Well, I like it. I use Olimar's down-taunt and his whistle during Taunt Matches. Cafinator (talk) 02:22, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Being a Bowser mainer, I spam Bowser's down taunt cuz it's just weird for a giant lizard to do such a funny dance. Shade (talk) 05:46, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I was stuck on that too. What's worse was that I thought he was doing a battle pose when I had a smaller TV. Y'know, the televisions on a floor or surface. Pssh. Cafinator (talk) 06:50, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Common/Uncommon

To prevent a forthcoming edit war, I think it's pretty clear that we establish that Taunt Matches are uncommon in the grand scheme of WiFi play. Considering that there was already a lengthy debate over whether or not a "Taunt Match" was notable enough for an article in the first place, it is obviously not "common in WiFi play." Gargomon's edit should stand. --RJM ^Talk 22:05, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

I have Taunt Matches all the time. You just don't like 'em. I'll just delete that part of the article entirely. Cafinator (talk) 22:29, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

I don't really think there was much of a debate on their being notable: consensus was pretty clear. Maybe it's just me, but the wifi games I've played usually have a croucher who wants to start goofing around, but usually do not end up as a full-blown taunt match. Hopefully a little bit of explanation will help stop the edit war more than deleting an edit an admin said to keep.–Entrea Sumatae 22:34, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Or I guess you can start another edit war... but if that's how you wanna do things, then screw that, I'm not playing.–Entrea Sumatae 22:35, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Gee willakers, everyone is so happy today! Cafinator (talk) 22:37, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Address your points on the talk page when the effort has been put forth to open a discussion over an edit war. It is much more helpful than reverting edits and coupling the reverts with a terse and baseless rebuttal in the edit summary. It says: "You said yourself that you have had Taunt Matches over Wifi, and that you just don't like them. To prevent an "Edit war", I'll just delete this part of the page." Setting aside for the moment that I would never falsify an edit "just because I don't like them", I should also point out that your argument seems to speak to the existence of the article, not the commonality of Taunt Matches. I have already asserted that I'm fine with the article existing and recognize that there's enough dullards in the world doing this for notability. That doesn't make them "common"--in fact, I would argue that at least 30% of ALL WiFi matches would have to be Taunt Matches in order to lay claim to notability. The thing is, the numbers aren't even close to 30% and you don't need research to prove it. --RJM ^Talk 23:25, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

I would just like to note that I never once said I had any sort of dislike for taunt matches. I don't know if you were referring to me. The fact is, yes, maybe one person does mess around, but I can never be sure of the intent of the player, nor have I ever seen it escalate into a full-on Taunt Match, even in the loosest sense. Usually it's just some spammer being a smart-*** or some n00b who doesn't seem to know what she/he's doing. I witnessed a Spectator Match with a surprisingly slow and/or unresponsive DK but it didn't look like they were trying to mock the other players, and nobody really payed attention. - Gargomon251 (talk) 11:03, 29 August 2008 (UTC)