User talk:Emmett/Archive 1

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

Oh why can't this wiki have a Template:Clear like Guildwiki? /sigh.. --Shadowcrest 04:14, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Many wiki(a)s have them located at T:Clr, T:Clrl, and T:Clrr. :) --Sky (t · c · w) 22:25, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Win! I've only used GuildWiki and other Guild Wars wikis, didn't know that. Thanks! --Shadowcrest 20:36, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Fighter Pages

First of all, thanks for helping out with cleaning up the character pages. Secondly, just so your not editing something that is going to go away soon, take a look at SmashWiki:Post-Merge Cleanup to see the format that all the fighter pages are going to be put in once I/we get enough time to do them all. Falco (SSBB) and Meta Knight (SSBB) are already in this format. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 14:07, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

I had noticed the format on different characters was off. I'll work on it when I get the chance (eg now). --Shadowcrest 02:50, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Or not, I apparently share an IP with GalaxiaD and have been banned until tomorrow. Unless Randall checks his email between now and then. Remind me to rant on the admin noticeboard (wherever it is) about not using the auto-block feature. --Shadowcrest 03:10, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Unfortunately, we have to use the auto-block feature because many of the vandals have a range of computers or a slightly variable IP. Hitting with auto-blocks keeps them from just logging out after they are banned. It's much easier than calculating a binary range block code, and most of the admins wouldn't even know what to do. Plus, that can go wrong and lock out whole continents. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 20:52, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

I have a perfectly reasonable and rational explanation in my head, but it doesn't look good on paper :<

On an unrelated note, who are the prominent members here? There are a couple sysops that I can think of, but other than that I don't know anyone but Entrea, GalaxiaD and Oxico (and they have both left, or so I hear). --Shadowcrest 21:02, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Well, Randall00 and I are the most active sysops on here. I take care of a lot of the day to day work and gameplay information and Randall does a lot of the back end work, although we really do whatever is needed at any point in time. Sky2042 is another sysop, and he's probably the most knowledgeable about templates and MediaWiki type stuff. Also, Silverdragon706 is a sysop, but she hasn't been around as much lately. The active non-sysops that I often work with are Gargomon251 and Wolf O'Donnell, as well as my crewmate Ax. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 21:09, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

re-write of Zelda (SSBB) article

moved to User:Shadowcrest/Zelda

qualms with merge-cleanup

1. Costumes, Entrance, idle poses, victory pose
2. changes from melee->brawl
3. debut
4. audio
5. rename of tilts

auto-block

go rant. --Shadowcrest 04:46, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

And prepare for a policy invasion. Must set up for that too. --Shadowcrest 04:51, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Let me have a look at fixing the block. --Sky (t · c · w) 16:46, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Should be fixed. --Sky (t · c · w) 16:52, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Still blocked. #818, if you need it. --Shadowcrest 16:54, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

To clarify, only my IP is banned. My account is fine. Since Galaxia and I share(d) an IP, autoblock banned my IP for a day, and I am thus unable to contribute outisde my talk page. --Shadowcrest 17:09, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Well, that stinks. (By the way, Hi!) I must be missing something here, what with mostly being outside the community here, but... what exactly got Galaxia (and, by extension, you) banned at all?–Entrea Sumatae 17:38, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi Entrea! How'd you find me here? You weren't even on IRC when I brought SSBwikia up.

I'm not quite sure, really. I think it involved him being a prick to someone who was an admin and they blocked him for it. Oh, and it might have also involved impersonating a user (who I think was an admin, and the same admin at that). Except for the impersonation, would you agree that would not have happened on guildwiki? --Shadowcrest 17:48, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

I found you here because I RC patrol here too. I usually just correct facts and such, mostly ignoring talkpages and such except for rumors or stuff that are up for deletion. As for what happened, I still have no idea what event sparked it, but I'm sure as hell that a 3-month ban for a first block wouldn't last more than a couple hours on GuildWiki before someone overruled it.–Entrea Sumatae 17:56, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

It's odd that on GWiki I don't do a lot of mainspace overhauls and crusades, but here I am planning on cleaning up a bunch of stuff. Did you know this place merged with Wikia like we did? And they all hate monaco? If I could figure out how to change the logo, I'd give them the "monobookization" customization Pan/Jedi/May did.

Unless it was Raptors (raa!) a 3 month ban would never have passed, I agree. I also saw a threat to ban anyone who disagreed with the blocking of Galaxia- am I correct in saying that that would have resulting in possibly a consequence as severe as desysoption on Guildwiki?

Do you think it would be a good idea to import a bunch of our commonly referred to policies? NPA, 1RV, maybe YAV, AGF, AUNC (users not content)? And the admin noticeboard. --Shadowcrest 18:02, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure it would be a cause for desysoption (unless they actually carried out the threat): everyone overreacts sometimes.

And I did know about the Wikia merge (except they actually did merge, Wikia didn't have a Guild Wars wiki when we were absorbed). And if they don't like Monoco, showing them how to monobookize would be great. And yes, every wiki should have the exact same policies and stuff as ours, but it's probably unneeded to do a major overhaul.–Entrea Sumatae 18:14, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Also, stupid line.–Entrea Sumatae 18:16, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Since I can't post anywhere other than my talkpage, I have to do everything here until I'm unblocked. Including importing policies, test revision of the Zelda (SSBB) article, and any other main/wikispace action I would have taken until then. I'm separating the talk from the policy with (you guessed it) a line. I hate licensing. A lot. Why couldn't guildwiki be GFDL?!? :( --Shadowcrest 18:20, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm sure there must be some way to have our customizations without our logo (Smashwiki with Guildwiki logo in the corner lol), so I'm going to find it.–Entrea Sumatae 18:29, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

The simplest way would be to ask Pan, but he hasn't been seen in quite some time. --Shadowcrest 18:34, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Easy. Copy [1] to it's SmashWiki counterpart (Or your monaco.css). Monobook background looks a little wierd with Beach, but that can be changed.–Entrea Sumatae 18:35, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Way to edit conflict me. That's basically what I was going to say. We'd have to persuade smashwiki to set the same code but with their logo as their default to import it. I think. --Shadowcrest 18:37, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

The code there will use SmashWiki's own code. On my own .css, I fixed the colors too. It has the right colors and logo, so anyone who likes the monobooco skin can just copy (or import) that. By the way, monobooco is now the official name for the Monoco/Monobook hybrid.–Entrea Sumatae 18:44, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

According to who? Lol

I'd test importing your page, but I probably can't edit my own monaco.css. Anti-lol. --Shadowcrest 18:52, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

You should be unblocked now. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 20:36, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much. --Shadowcrest 20:39, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

---

I am auto blocked, once again. #857. --Shadowcrest 02:14, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Posting so I can add an edit summary to make this request more visible. --Shadowcrest 02:16, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Lol. SmashWiki hates you.–Entrea Sumatae 02:19, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

The rant in my head is getting better by the second ;) --Shadowcrest 02:20, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Charitwo. --Shadowcrest 02:27, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Signature Font

If you don't mind me asking, which font do you use for your signature? (Wolf O'Donnell (talk · contributions) 07:28, 15 August 2008 (UTC))

Just edit the page and look at his coding. (FYI, it's "Vivaldi")–Entrea Sumatae 15:45, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Yes, it's vivaldi. Back on GuildWiki, I started using this font, and then like 8 other people started to use it :P

You're welcome to use it as well. --Shadowcrest 19:19, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. (Wolf O'Donnell (talk · contributions) 19:32, 15 August 2008 (UTC))

Hope you don't mind me doing so as well, I want to stand out! Plus it looks neat. Oh, and your new policy ideas are brilliant, and I can't wait for them to be instated on the wiki. Cheezperson

Sure thing, thank you, and thank you :) --Shadowcrest 20:23, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Im Toast

I'm toast aren't I. Im gonna get banned pretty soon. Zmario (talk) 00:51, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Fallacy

I know what it is! The problem is that it is not Chuck Norris doing the calculations! –Entrea Sumatae 02:58, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

How much chuck would a woodchuck chuck if a woodchuck could Chuck Norris? ... All of it. --Shadowcrest 03:00, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

You just blew my mind. –Entrea Sumatae 03:05, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

I agree. --Shadowcrest 03:07, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

In seriousness, if x=y, then x-y=0; therefore, anything over x-y is a division by zero and cannot be calculated. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 21:04, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Yes. And since only Chuck Norris can divide by 0, that's where Entrea's comment came from. --Shadowcrest 21:18, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

And if you compare revisons, you will see my last post contained an explanation that Shadowcrest then removed.–Entrea Sumatae 21:51, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Yeah. I wanted to let other people guess, but I could just hide his whole comment :P --Shadowcrest 22:07, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Mah boi...

Are we allowed to have PIs? Blue Ninjakoopa (talk) 23:16, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

...what? 4srs, cnt ndrstnd u --Shadowcrest 20:29, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

I meant are we allowed to have P3450|\|/-\|_ images. --Blue Ninjakoopa (talk) 21:32, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, if they're in the beta template. Read. --Shadowcrest 21:35, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Oh, I guess not. This. Mine is related to Smash Bros., so I don't really know. Ask the admins somewhere... Admin noticeboard, perhaps? --Shadowcrest 21:41, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Test

A-B-C. 1-2-3. Do-Re-Mi. --Sky (t · c · w) 21:19, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Well, it worked like it's supposed to. Thanks. --Shadowcrest 21:35, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Signature

Fair enough, can do."SK--Bow down to the king.~Now what have you done? 18:27, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

"SmoreKing-Bow down to the king.~Now what have you done? There ya go.

Still too long for my tastes, but at least I can tell who it is :P Thanks. --Shadowcrest 18:40, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

mah page

thanks. i forgot i left that there. --Blue Ninjakoopa ^{Talk to me} 19:26, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Whoa

← moved to User talk:Blue Ninjakoopa

Two things about the poll

First of all, last week I removed the same poll that you put up today. If you didn't read my reasoning, it was that polls about the "worst" thing tend to be either a troll in and of themselves or an invitation to other users to troll. This is why GameFAQs doesn't allow top ten lists about the "worst" or "most overrated" games.

The bigger problem I have, however, is you contacting a blocked user and putting up content for him/her. Users get blocked for a reason; Cafinator's has been discussed extensively. I don't know a specific policy to point to, but I would extrapolate the no sockpuppets rule to include getting another user to do things for you. You are obviously an intelligent and devoted editor, and I'm sure you can understand the reasoning behind my thoughts here. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 17:04, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

I didn't read your reasoning for removing it because I didn't know where to find it. (I just now checked the history.) Tbh I didn't even know you removed it a first time. So, apologies for that, and I can try to come up with a better poll in a little while.

I read your post on Talk:Main Page after I had posted the poll, and I couldn't just revert (the numbers had already been reset, would have looked stupid, etc. etc.) I do understand your reasoning, though I have some reservations about specific instances. --Shadowcrest 17:31, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Edit: I see you've already changed the poll, so that's good. And I must also assume the extensive discussion about Cafinator's ban has happened privately elsewhere, because as far as I know the only discussion that has occured was between Cafinator and Randall, though of course I could merely be unaware. --Shadowcrest 17:35, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Most of the discussion happend priviately between Randall and Cafinator, although there is some on his talk page where I added my two cents about why he is and should be blocked. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 22:29, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

BNK talk

Now what do you possibly have to gain from starting a debate on a subject you weren't even a part of? That conversation ended when BNK was banned, and we're keeping it that way. If you have anything to say, go ahead, but don't expect me, BNK, or anyone originally in the conversation to hear it. MarioGalaxy {talk} 19:39, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

What do I personally have to gain? Nothing. What could other people gain from it? The fact that your reasoning sucked and you should stop criticizing KirbyKing for nothing. (That 'you' is collective.)

At the risk of sounding cliched (but I've always wanted to use this phrase), you and what army? "..on a subject you weren't even a part of? That conversation ended when BNK was banned, and we're keeping it that way." It's a wiki, in case you've forgotten; you're not going to stop me just by telling me that you declared it over. If you don't wish me to comment on your failures, take them somewhere I won't see them (eg. off wiki). If you guys refuse to listen to solid logic and wish to retain your erronous thoughts, I can't stop you. --Shadowcrest 19:51, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Your Sig

...Has no link to your talk page. And if you are against link hovering for unknown or abbreviated signatures, then you should really be against not having a link to your talk page.Smore Talk 15:19, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Incorrect; you misunderstood my opposition, and I don't quite follow your logic. I am opposed to unidentifyable signatures. Having a link to my talk page doesn't make it more easily identifyable than just a link to my userpage, it just makes for less code. What does link hovering have to do with a talkpage link? --Shadowcrest 22:50, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Um, I know I'm not in this conversation, just one question. Link hovering is when you hold your cursor over the sig, right? Well, I get your point. MarioGalaxy {talk} 22:52, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome to participate in any conversation held on wiki imo, that's why it's a wiki :P

Yes, that's what link-hovering is. Whose point do you get? --Shadowcrest 22:56, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Your point. You're talking about sigs that don't identify the user (RJM, FyreNWater, etc.), while SmoreKing thought you meant sigs that don't have links to a user's talk page or contribs. MarioGalaxy {talk} 22:59, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Well, not necessarily contributions, but talk pages yes. I'm just saying maybe you should put a link to your talk page.SmoreKingxg456BOO! 23:29, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

User:Shadowcrest/~ is good.SmoreKingxg456BOO! 23:36, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Like I said in my edit summary, your logic still doesn't make sense to me, but I guess it doesn't do any harm. I've changed my preferences to reflect the change. --Shadowcrest 23:38, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. SmoreKingxg456BOO! 23:39, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Smash Arena

I'm very sorry for what I said to you. You may edit the page but please leave it how it is. It's easier for my to count the votes (even though a poll is EASIER) and I can get a little opinion on why they wanna vote. The comment section is used for the users to voice their opinions about the fight. So yea, I'm very sorry and thank you for actually liking my idea, lol. So yea, VOTE for this weeks fight! Squallinoa 08 (talk) 01:35, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Article Requests

← moved to User talk:Miles.oppenheimer

Disambig

Thanks for dealing with the leftover redirects from moving by changing 'em to disambigs. Could you maybe help clean up the split articles? Thanks! {My name is Miles, and I approve this message.} 23:14, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

RE:elitist and overbearing

← moved to User talk:Cheezperson

Sig font

I hope you don't mind, I have used the same signature font as you, as it makes me seem much more srs.

Cordially,

O, Mighty Smoreking 00:07, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

I don't mind. Good luck with your newfound srsbsns self. :) --Shadowcrest 00:19, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Vandal

Please help un-move what he moved. It's blocking me from moving because of how many un-moves I've already done. Thank you! {My name is Miles, and I approve this message.} 18:26, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Because of wikia's restrictions on moving pages, once someone posts on the page it's supposed to be on, it can't be moved back except by sysops. So I can't help with those, and Eulalia seems to be getting those. And the move throttle probably helped us more than hurt us, so I can't really complain about that. --Shadowcrest 18:34, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

I don't fail

← moved to User talk:Miles.oppenheimer

Merging

Just out of curiosity, I have a question to ask you. Why do you always tend to support merging similar articles (Blaster, Reflector, Fire Fox/Bird/Wolf, Glire/Glunder/Glice) and only disagree when there's no practical way to do it? I usually tend to lean the other way and was interested in why you think these types of things should be merged. {My name is Miles, and I approve this message.} 15:14, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Because they're all mostly the same thing with minor variations. Glice/ire/under all do the same thing, just with different side effects; the blasters are just Fox/Falco/Wolf's spammable special (and they're all semi-clones anyway imo), etc. There's no point in having 3 separate articles when 1 could cover it all. --Shadowcrest 15:19, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Hmm... I disagree, but I'll respect your opinion. {My name is Miles, and I approve this message.} 15:21, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Why do you disagree, out of curiosity. --Shadowcrest 15:22, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Because all of the Blasters, despite their similairty, are different enough to warrant their own pages. The same works for the rest of them in my opinion. I'd rather have a few smaller pages that focus on individual moves than one big conglomerate page. {My name is Miles, and I approve this message.} 15:26, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Well then I guess agreeing to disagree is the only viable solution, because there's really not a middle-ground in between :P --Shadowcrest 15:27, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

So be it. O_o {My name is Miles, and I approve this message.} 15:31, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Don't ever...

hate ParaGoomba348. He is the best person in the world. Red Heart (talk) 14:18, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

...but can he dance? Sorry 'bout that. I have a question for you: if you were me, would you run for sysop, or run for rollback? I can't decide which I need more. Cheezperson {talk}stuff 04:14, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

uh... you know, that brings up a good point. I have no fucking clue how you guys (meaning you and other AD members, primarily) would use the block function, which is a big point of my general support/oppose criteria for sysop. However, I'd say go for rollback for the time being. --Shadowcrest 04:20, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

this might sound strange, but I'd like to be sysop (for the most part) for the other tools, like merge and delete. I always feel insignificant when I have to ask a sysop for assistance with something like that. Cheezperson {talk}stuff 04:23, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

WTS YAV $19.99 --Shadowcrest 04:27, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

i didn't mean it like that, I meant it like "I wish I could just do that myself." Think I should give it a try? Cheezperson {talk}stuff 04:39, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

RfA archive

Can you just leave it alone? I understand what you're trying to do, but it's not going to accomplish anything except make other users think that they can edit the archives of failed RfA's. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 18:50, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

I was planning on making an "archived" template to place on them. Would that be acceptable, or would you prefer I not touch the old ones? --Shadowcrest 18:52, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Just don't touch them. People ignore the archive template. Plus, it defeats the purpose of an archive if we change the content or ordering. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 18:54, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Fine, fine. Though they're still ugly :p --Shadowcrest 18:55, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

I'll agree that they are. I'll also agree that your new method is very good. Feel free to implement it into the current RfA's. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 18:59, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, working on it now :) --Shadowcrest 19:00, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Conflicts

I know how to settle conflicts, I do it all the time in scouts! I'm the head guy there, and they turn to me whenever there's a problem. I suppose being somewhat "new" at this may be a urn-off, but like Obama, I will do my best for the site despite what others may think of me. Cheezperson {talk}stuff 23:18, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

While I am glad you are self-confident and believe in your abilities, I can not in good faith excuse my doubts because of real-life^(TM) circumstances. For example, one of GuildWiki's previous bureaucrats was, as a friend put it, "prO with debate club and peer mediation" (and he was), but he still acted like an elitist ass on wiki and was also very successful as a bureaucrat. His success may have derived from his RL experiences, but that wasn't what made him a good bureaucrat. What made him a good bureaucrat was that he knew what he was doing; he has had a lot of experience with wikis. While the wiki-success may have been derived from RL, RL was not what made him successful. Therefore, I can not accept your conclusion... I'm sorry. --Shadowcrest 01:18, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

I accept your conclusion, to an extent, as not all people are alike. Thanks for moving that talk page thing btw. Cheezperson {talk}stuff 03:35, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

if i has an idea for a move for midna, do i just add it or wut? Xtrme Talk 2 X Wut X is doing 00:41, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Sure. It'll show up on my watchlist anyway, so go ahead. Thanks :) --Shadowcrest 00:44, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

ok

O, Mighty Smoreking 01:56, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

vandalism

← moved to User talk:MarioGalaxy

Nav Box

Hey Shadowcrest, it's MG. Title says it all. How do you get it to work? MarioGalaxy {talk} 21:28, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

To create a nav box, type:

{{User:Shadowcrest/navbox
 |title=MarioGalaxy (this will make the header MarioGalaxy instead of Shadowcrest)
 |list= <span class="plainlinks"> <span style="white-space:nowrap;"> (type in links here)
}}

--Shadowcrest 21:49, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. MarioGalaxy {talk} 21:54, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Maybe you saw this coming

You should make some featured article drafts too, like me and Miles. You seem to do a good job with everything else, so I'd assume you could do good with FA's too.^Smoreking^ Give Thanks 23:44, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Ironically, I had considered writing a couple :D

I thank you for your confidence, since it means a lot to me right now. I'll write them once inspiration strikes... and I finish writing this dumb letter to Roscoe Bartlett >.< --Shadowcrest 23:51, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Yeah...

← moved to User talk:Kperfekt722

Mm, Maybe I Should Mention It's An Attempt To Prevent Arguements. Your Off The List Due To Your... I Don't Know. Your Off The List Cuz You Were Nice About It Ha Ha. I Don't Have A Big Vocabulary XD KP317 (talk) 03:02, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Gif

I made a GIF for SmashWiki, but...it's 3 MB over the limit. Any suggestions? --Posted by Pikamander2 (Talk) at 16:25, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

http://i265.photobucket.com/albums/ii222/Pikamander2/RecoveryGIF1.gif

I... really have no idea. I am inexperienced at such things... perhaps Sky will know, but I really can't help. Sorry. --Shadowcrest 16:46, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Try breaking it in to two parts. Maybe it will help.^Smoreking^ Give Thanks 17:02, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Policy

I was wondering, seeing as you just made a nice policy about signatures, if you could help me improve my image policy. It's under project since I had originally had it as a project but have tried to make it a policy. Feel free to edit the page yourself after I make one small change. Miles (talk - contribs) 01:13, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

I'd say the image project is more of a project than a policy. How would you make it a policy? Cheezperson {talk}stuff 01:14, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Never mind, I figured it out. Cheezperson {talk}stuff 01:15, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you're trying to accomplish with that page. Are you trying to make a style & formatting guide regarding images, or are you trying to make an "image use" policy? --Shadowcrest 01:24, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

A sort of combination regarding what images are allowed and when to use them. It's vague, and that's part of the problem. I'm not trying to do this kind of guide, but rather trying to establish a sort of explanation of why the wiki needs images, what articles need them, etc. Miles (talk - contribs) 01:28, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

So you want a style and formatting guide? --Shadowcrest 01:30, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

User Page Edits

Hey Shadowcrest, it's MG. I was just wondering, but do you know how the "mechanics to User page edits work? Here's an example: You know that Dragonmaster User page? Well, I saw that you fixed the image, but I was doing the same thing just now. How come it only shows your edit, and there wasn't a edit conflict? Just curious. MarioGalaxy {talk} 22:43, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

At first I was confused, but then I realized what you meant.

What happened was, since we made the exact same change, it's called a "null edit", which means that the page was saved but no changes were made. Since I saved first, my edit showed up and not yours. Edit conflicts can only occur when we both edit the page at the same time, but our changes are different. --Shadowcrest 22:48, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Well, what do you mean by different? We were both finishing the "]]" section of the image text. Plus, your change did happen, since we can now see the image. MarioGalaxy {talk} 22:50, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

We would have had to have added different text to make an edit conflict occur. For example, if I had typed ]] while you were typing %% and I saved first, you'd get an edit conflict. Since we both typed ]], your revision was the same as mine and it's almost as if your edit never happened. (There is one use for null edits, but I don't know how to explain it, I just know how it's useful.) --Shadowcrest 22:54, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Oh, OK. Thanks for the explanation. MarioGalaxy {talk} 22:55, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

hmm... That's strange

You haven't opposed my RfR yet. Considering what has happened in the last 10 minutes, I figured you would of.(By the way, when are you going to start those FA drafts?) But in all srsns, please don't oppose me.SmoreKing Happy Holidays! 23:38, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

uh.

uh, can I just say HOLY CRAP. and I thought I had done alot. but then again, his/hers use images, and are all disaligned and larger. But it's still evident that there are more than mine. Also, I would just reply on my talk page, like your big sign says, but it also mentions pointing towards a comment that I made that you possibly ignored. I'm not saying you ignored it, but you never did acknowledge my comment I added telling you I would strike out my neutral comment on your RfA. Geez, that was a mouthfull. Baltro [ talk ] 05:30, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

SHADOWCREST MAH BOIIIII

The sig is phix'd@@@ Koopa Klaus 22:01, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Hope U made lotsa speggeti BNK! Masterman What's the matter? Scared? 22:14, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

trolling

← moved to User talk:Blue Ninjakoopa

Moveset

Since it says Halp plz, I assume I am in position to say this, for the down throw of Midna, may I suggest making it where she slams the opponent on the ground then hits them with her magic orange hand/hair thing.SmoreKing Happy Holidays! 22:07, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

My Sig

That's strange, it shows three lines on my screen, and my Internet Explorer is on full screen. Maybe it's your computer? MarioGalaxy ^{Death has a price. I've paid it...} 22:49, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Enough

Quit stirring the pot. We're done arguing, so there's no need for you to call me a troll anymoar. Koopa Klaus 23:09, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Then please don't link to me in things like that. :/ --Shadowcrest 23:11, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

I expected you to write something completely different, but I see your point. Sorry. In your summary, you could've wrote "Plz don't link me in this forum" or something like that. :^) Koopa Klaus 23:15, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Hmm

People seem to turn to you for rules here. Is there any pressing tasks that need to be done?User:DCP

Osry

← moved to User talk:Blue Ninjakoopa

User:Zixor

Hi there, Have I ever asked you to Brawl before? Zixor (talk) 22:06, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

It's possible, but the answer is I can't because I don't have wifi capabilities :( --Shadowcrest 22:07, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Dammit.... Koopa Claus ^{Happy Holidays} 22:12, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Userpage policy

Good idea on making one. I'd like to help you with it, if you'd accept my services. Cheezperson {talk}stuff 23:29, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Well really I was just going to take GWW's user page policy and modify it, though you're welcome to comment on it or submit your own draft if you feel so inclined. --Shadowcrest 23:38, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

No it looks good! Obviously, the image rules will have to change (administration here doesn't like personal pictures on userpages). Other than that, I think It'll work. Just put it up and see what people think. Cheezperson {talk}stuff 23:54, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Just as a clarification, personal images are OK if they are an image of you. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 00:02, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

I thought it was just one for smasher pages. So you're saying no personal images on userpages (unless they're of yourself). Cheezperson {talk}stuff 00:13, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Span style/font color

Hey Shadowcrest, it's MG. Do you mind if I ask you a small question? You see, I saw (overheard wouldn't make sense) your conversation with PG348 about span and font. Does that only apply to links to user/talk pages (in sigs and links in general), or does that also apply to simple text? Just curious. If this seems to unimportant, you can just cross out this comment. Thank you. MarioGalaxy ^{A Galaxy begins anew...} 23:42, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Firstly, it was not I who corrected you, but Sky2042. (that rhymed, I'm so ftw)

Secondly, font tags are depreciated and are no longer the standard to use. While they may work now as sky said, they may not always work so, whereas span is the offical tags used by html and xthml. Wherever a font tag is used, span is the preferable substitute, whether in links or text or what-have-you. --Shadowcrest 00:00, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Ah. That's all I needed to hear. Thank you. MarioGalaxy ^{A Galaxy begins anew...} 00:01, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Userpage policy

Good idea on making one. I'd like to help you with it, if you'd accept my services. Cheezperson {talk}stuff 23:29, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Well really I was just going to take GWW's user page policy and modify it, though you're welcome to comment on it or submit your own draft if you feel so inclined. --Shadowcrest 23:38, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

No it looks good! Obviously, the image rules will have to change (administration here doesn't like personal pictures on userpages). Other than that, I think It'll work. Just put it up and see what people think. Cheezperson {talk}stuff 23:54, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Just as a clarification, personal images are OK if they are an image of you. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 00:02, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

I thought it was just one for smasher pages. So you're saying no personal images on userpages (unless they're of yourself). Cheezperson {talk}stuff 00:13, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Span style/font color

Hey Shadowcrest, it's MG. Do you mind if I ask you a small question? You see, I saw (overheard wouldn't make sense) your conversation with PG348 about span and font. Does that only apply to links to user/talk pages (in sigs and links in general), or does that also apply to simple text? Just curious. If this seems to unimportant, you can just cross out this comment. Thank you. MarioGalaxy ^{A Galaxy begins anew...} 23:42, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Firstly, it was not I who corrected you, but Sky2042. (that rhymed, I'm so ftw)

Secondly, font tags are depreciated and are no longer the standard to use. While they may work now as sky said, they may not always work so, whereas span is the offical tags used by html and xthml. Wherever a font tag is used, span is the preferable substitute, whether in links or text or what-have-you. --Shadowcrest 00:00, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Ah. That's all I needed to hear. Thank you. MarioGalaxy ^{A Galaxy begins anew...} 00:01, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Aha

;D	This user thinks you rock.

Baltro [ talk ]

Well I know I'm awesome, but why this time in particular? :P --Shadowcrest 05:02, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Uhh. I dunno. I mean, you know, just floating around on a wiki, you see things (hear them?) people say, and I just agree with alot of those things that you say. ;D And Vivaldi is one of the best fonts ever. Baltro [ talk ] 05:05, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Uh, let me explain. And I swear to god, if I get an edit conflict, I will bite somebody's head off. The thing that's included in the template is when you post one of those templates (like the welcome template) that has a page line (==you, know==) included in the template. If you try to edit the page line the template includes, you will end up editing the template itself. It's easily remedied by the old {{subst:User:Baltro/Rock}} Baltro [ talk ] 05:08, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Way to be humble, Shadow. :P You're one of the people who have a serious chance of becoming an admin, and I think all admins are awesome! :D Friedbeef1 Ho ho ho! 05:05, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! I catch a lot of crap for what I say, so it's nice to know someone believes in me :P

Vivaldi is indeed the most awesome font ever. It is so awesome that I have increased my awesome level by a factor of 1337. This status is unattainable by anyone less awesome than me, so don't try :P

Oh, I see what you did thar Baltro. I don't know how that would have happened with the userbox template, though :/

I'm using Signet of Humility on Shadowcrest! --Shadowcrest 05:20, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

I love Shadowcrest too. Koopa Claus ^{Happy Holidays} 05:21, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Whoa, too many people. Think I might be sick. And yeah, it happens whenever a page header is included in a non-substituted template. (holy crap, those were some big words.) Anyways, I'm off to bed. Good night all. Baltro [ talk ] 05:22, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Yeah

Uhm, Shadowcrest, I hate to ask, but is my signature accetable? Baltro [ talk ] 21:35, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Yeah. --Shadowcrest 21:43, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

The <big> code on the B doesn't disrupt text? ;D Baltro [ talk ] 21:46, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Not that I can tell... if I become aware that it does you'll have to change it, but afaik it's fine. --Shadowcrest 21:50, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Actually, it does look like it breaks it. I'll have to check and make sure, but it might be best if you change it. --Shadowcrest 21:51, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

What's wrong with your old sig, Baltro? Friedbeef1 Ho ho ho! 21:54, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Sorry for being a disturbance, but I changed it again. I'm pretty positive this one is acceptable, since it doesn't use the big code, but instead uses smaller characters and the small code. BALτʀο [ talk ]

:O

Well, how do I get it? How does it work? *pillars you with questions* Koopa Klaus ^{Happy Holidays} 00:05, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Thank you, Shadowcrest! =) Koopa Klaus ^{Happy Holidays} 00:31, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

I'm there, but where do I enter "/join #wikia-smashbros"? If I enter it in the URL box it takes me to google results. :( Koopa Klaus ^{Happy Holidays} 11:19, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Nevermind then I guess.... Blue Ninjakoopa ^{Happy Holidays} 23:25, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Message from Wikia Community Team

I don't know if you already got this message, but: "All wikis will be "read-only" from 9am - 10am UTC Tuesday morning (that's 1:00am Pacific, 4:00am Eastern). During this time, editing will be disabled while we do some routine maintenance, but you will still be able to access the site." MarioGalaxy^Talk 23:22, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I got it on GuildWiki (where I'm an admin). I suggest you go alert the nearest admin and tell them to put it on MediaWiki:Sitenotice. --Shadowcrest 23:24, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Oh, I hadn't thought of that. Thanks. I'll tell MaskedMarth, since he's here at the moment. He already made a forum for this message. MarioGalaxy^Talk 23:25, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Do only sysops get that message direrctly? I got one at CD-i wiki (I'm a sysop there). Cheezperson {talk}stuff 23:26, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Fallacy

You can't divide by zero, so the equation is null.SmoreKing Happy Holidays! 02:04, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Yep. --Shadowcrest 02:06, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

I need math lessons. Blue Ninjakoopa ^{Happy Holidays} 02:06, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Oh yeah... I get it. Isn't that like the laws of zero or something? You can't divide any number by zero, meaning it's "undefined", but you can divide 0 by a number, although the answer will still be zero. MarioGalaxy^Talk 02:11, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

                    x = y
                   xy = y^2
             xy - x^2 = y^2 - x^2
          x * (y - x) = (y + x) * (y - x)
x * (y - x) / (y - x) = (y + x) * (y - x) / (y - x)
                    x = y + x

         If x = 1 and y = 1, then
                    1 = 1 + 1

                    1 = 2

Under those circumstances, this would happen:

                    1 = 1
                   1*1(1) = 1^2(1)
             1*1(1) - 1^2(1) = 1^2(1) - x^2(1) (0)
          1 * (1 - 1)(0)(0) = (1 + 1)(2) * (1 - 1)(0)(0)
1 * (1 - 1)(0)(0) / (1 - 1)(0)(Divide by zero; impossible) = (1 + 1)(2) * (1 - 1)(0)(0) / (1 - 1)(0)(Again, divide by zero, impossible)
                    1 = 1 + 1(although it didn't happen due to the divide by zero)

         If x = 1 and y = 1, then
                    1 = 1 + 1

                    1 = 2

If that makes sense.SmoreKing Happy Holidays! 02:13, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

I'll sound like a nerd, but that was kind of fun to solve. Key word:Kind of.SmoreKing Happy Holidays! 02:16, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Chuck Norris can divide by zero... Masterman 2009 20:45, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

My Navbox

You think you can help me with this navbox? Whatever Wiki is in it, it has that navbox, which is the idea. I had a theory that if that {{:w:User:Name}} would show my page on whatever Wiki I want, then adding "/navbox" would also apply. I was correct. But, now this is a very minor problem, usually if the link to a page is on the page itself, it will bold. That isn't happening in this case. You think you can help me on this minor problem? MarioGalaxy^Talk 21:05, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

I believe the auto-bold on self links only works with internal links. Since the link is external, it doesn't auto-bold. Here, I had to manually bold it, which- if done in a universal box like you have- wouldn't work. I guess I just forgot to manually bold it here... --Shadowcrest 21:31, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Ah well. Thanks anyway. MarioGalaxy^Talk 21:33, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Midna

Some Suggestions:

• Up Tilt-Punches upwards with her hair.
• Forward Tilt-Like her Neutral, but a bit stronger
• Down Tilt-Foot jab thing like Lucas/Ness
• Forward Smash-Spins Forward(Like Zelda's Nair motion) and releases twilight.
• Down Smash-Creates a ball of twilight at her foot and spins around.
• Up Smash-Creates a little thing of twilight at her foot that pushes foes up into her hair that punches upwards.(Like ROB's, but with a little upwards push at the beginning)
• Uair-An upside down version of her Dair.

Yeah, something like that.SmoreKing Happy Holidays! 01:51, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Notes to self

Any help with filling me in on what I missed during my absense would be greatly appreciated.
If they exist, check:

1. User talk:Clarinet Hawk
2. User talk:Defiant Elements
3. User talk:Miles.oppenheimer
4. User talk:Semicolon
5. User talk:Shadowcrest/SmashWiki
6. User talk:Sky2042
7. User talk:SZL
8. User talk:SZL/Overhaul
9. SmashWiki talk:Admin noticeboard
10. [[SmashWiki talk:Administrate users, not content]]
11. SmashWiki talk:Administrators
12. SmashWiki talk:Administrators' noticeboard
13. SmashWiki talk:Assume good faith
14. SmashWiki talk:Blocking policy
15. SmashWiki talk:Community Portal
16. SmashWiki talk:No personal attacks
17. SmashWiki talk:Only revert once
18. SmashWiki talk:Policy
19. SmashWiki talk:Post-Merge Cleanup
20. SmashWiki talk:Quietly deal with vandals
21. SmashWiki talk:Sign your comments
22. SmashWiki talk:User pages
23. SmashWiki talk:You are valuable
24. SmashWiki talk:What SmashWiki is not
25. Template talk:Violation

Not much on anything, we changed a few words on Template:Violation, SZL broke his arm, DE created a page like you and SZL, and SZL's overhaul thing didn't get that many new comments.Smoreking^(T) _(c) 00:03, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

You should also check SmashWiki talk:Requests for rollback. Y462 (T • C • E ) 00:08, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

I feel it would be wrong to express anything other than the truth here, no matter how bad it sounds, so here goes...

I am, frankly, disappointed. Nothing has been accomplished since my departure 10 days ago, and slightly more than nothing has even been discussed, with the comments on the RfR page and the creation of DE's new thoughts page being basically all. :/ --Shadowcrest 00:32, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

ghey

Thanks for your support. I didn't think you had it in you. Blue Ninjakoopa ^{Happy Holidays} 06:07, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

I r lazy :p

Can you give me the link to your RfA so I can support you? Blue Ninjakoopa 22:00, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

here. --Shadowcrest 22:06, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

I SUPPORTED YOU =) Blue Ninjakoopa 22:13, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Talk page messages

Hey Shadowcrest. This is something that I've noticed for a while, but I didn't think would be a big problem. Some users (such as yourself) usually reply to given messages on your own talk page (although that's what's supposed to be done, many users don't do that anymore or in the first place). Do you think we should try and make a template similar to this one from Wikipedia? Although, maybe we should use a different image, like maybe one of Mr. Resetti's pictures (you know, when he lectures players in the middle of a match). What are your thoughts on this? MarioGalaxy^{May Guthix be with you...} 03:06, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

You're/Your

I think that's the bigger problem, IMO :p Blue Ninjakoopa^Talk 20:10, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

y

Doesn't anyone use the #s no moar? Blue Ninjakoopa^Talk 00:33, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

In IE7, they're broken. I've had this problem with bulleted lists, too. I'm trying to work out what they are. Additionally, there is no downside to using a hardcoded list- it's not changing anytime soon. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shadowcrest (talk • contribs)

Sorry. And what I said about his true interest in pokemon, I meant that he learns and studies everything so he can appear smarter and better than everyone else. Still, I was wrong, and I apologize. Blue Ninjakoopa^Talk 19:56, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

By the way, congratulations on your promotion to SysOp. I have no clue how you did it, but you made history. Blue Ninjakoopa^Talk 19:57, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

I think it's best you tell Gargomon to leave me alone. Blue Ninjakoopa^Talk 16:54, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Congratulations

On your promotion to admin. Toon Ganondorf (t c)

Thanks! --Shadowcrest 17:53, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Grr

Too much happens in a week. I missed so much stuff. Anyways, congratulations on adminship.Smoreking^(T) _(c) 00:32, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Hey. I completely understand what you were saying, but is there any chance we could make a page on this tournament?

Ok, I understand. Thanks for the warning. I will be more careful in the future. ~Teh Blue Blur~^{A revolution begins.} 19:34, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Just to let you know, he's still at it off smashwiki. I don't know if it really concerns you, but i can give you the quote if you want. ~Teh Blue Blur~^{A revolution begins.} 20:20, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

You should see his rant at me on Kirby Wiki...Silvie (talk) 20:24, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Policy

You have an interesting concept: that SW:ROLL has had any sort of consensus. It hasn't. In fact the only two people to talk about a rollback policy of any sort are you and me. No one else has left their opinions anywhere about this. I disagreed with parts of your version, and you with parts of mine. So why, may I ask, was mine marked as failed while yours was added to the RfR page? Miles (talk) 02:41, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Because I, unlike anyone else, commented on the page. If you like, I can bury you in walls of text about why mine is better than yours, but after months of trying to get people to comment on the proposed policies- it's in the freaking sitenotice and still not a single comment has been posted on most of those proposed pages- I gave up on the effort, as it clearly was not going to be successful. I can point out various flaws in yours- you did not for mine, simply stating you liked yours better- and then you state you don't really care which is implemented, as long as one was. Seeing as I have one that I very clearly support over the other and you really don't, and I have arguments for mine and as far as I'm aware you don't for yours, I adopted mine. If it means that much to you, go start a discussion on the RFR page about whether you prefer mine or yours. --Shadowcrest 02:47, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

You are being far more civil than I had feared. I'll look into it. Miles (talk) 02:51, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

...er...what? --Shadowcrest 02:52, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Never mind. Miles (talk) 02:55, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Hey

RFD, now.Smoreking^(T) _(c) 01:43, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

plz halp :(

The Blue Blur gets this stupid idea that I'm the one that's been harassing L33tSilvie using other accounts, and it's beginning to annoy me. Your words have more impact than mine do. Blue Ninjakoopa 20:10, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Hey

(I'm Getting Sick Of Writing These Messages) As you may have seen, I've been trying to change my ways and make peace with other users on the Wiki. I apologize if I may have gone to far in any arguements I may have gotten in with you. Kperfekt722 These Rules Are Stupid 23:46, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

O...k. What prompted that? :p --Shadowcrest 23:49, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

IDK, I'm just sick of being enemies with 90% of the users on the Wiki. I'm not gonna lie, part of it is becoming an sysop at some point, but it's a small part, and I won't run for that until I have fully paid my previous wrongs back. Kperfekt722 These Rules Are Stupid 23:53, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

unbanned IP

Um, Shadowcrest? I'm pretty sure that IP is the same as 3 others that annoyed me with the same routine (one just did the same thing to me last week): Added a completely obvious fact to an article, and then informing me that he did so. The first to do this was from a month or two ago, but he actually wanted to brawl me first (which is pretty weird for an IP). I told him that if I win, he had to buzz off (didn't think he would keep to it, though, and I was eventually right). These guys all did the same thing, although I can't prove it's the same guy. All I know is that this IP isn't trying to contribute. MarioGalaxy^{Death has a price. I've paid it...} 23:47, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

If s/he continues adding pointless notes such as those, then I will reinstate the block. Until then, however, I will assume good faith and allow him to continue to edit. --Shadowcrest 23:49, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

OK. It just seems weird to me that all of these IPs keep informing me that they added an obvious fact to an article. But, hey, you're the sysop. You know better. MarioGalaxy^{Death has a price. I've paid it...} 23:51, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Less deference tbh. --Shadowcrest 23:52, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

For you...

O ty. --Shadowcrest 23:51, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Some help please...

Hi shadow crest. I've made a wiki called "Bubble Bobble wiki" and i really need help with making a logo. I've made a logo with the right directions, but i can't save it as the actual logo. I thought, as you're an admin, you'd know about all this stuff. this is the file for the logo, I just dont know how to make it work as one... If you help out my wiki, i guess i could make you a sysop. --~Teh Blue Blur~^{A revolution begins.} 15:46, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

My post

Did you delete my post? If you did, why?

I did not technically 'delete' it- is is still accessable by going to the page's history, and you can see individual edits by comparing them. I removed your edit because it doesn't belong there- there's a note at the top of the Tier list talk page that comments about rankings should be taken to the forums. --Shadowcrest 02:13, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Why it was deleted We don't need more complaints on the forums. - Hatake91 (talk) 02:27, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

WTF?

Why'd you protect the DYK template? Smoreking's edit was the correct one, so can you please change it back?? Blue Ninjakoopa 00:20, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

I protected it because:

1. Because I didn't feel like giving out warnings for revert wars
2. Because the edit is true. If you read it, it actually makes sense. Whether or not it belongs is a matter of discussion- put it on the talk page and wait for consensus. --Shadowcrest 00:30, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

So it makes sense now? Okay, I see how it is. Blue Ninjakoopa 00:32, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Here we go again...

Okay, that's it. I honestly don't know what happened to "Let's not make BNK angry so that it keeps him from blowing up and getting banned" attitude of yours, because it's changed to "The Blue Blur is innocent, so I'll back him up and call BNK a troll!", and I'm sorry for my recent trolling (you don't remember? Check PG's talk page and prolly TBB's as well... oh, and some of the forums). Will you please stop harassing me now?? KTHNX. Blue Ninjakoopa 21:33, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Screw all that, I was just wondering why you stood (?) there and let TBB accuse me of sockpuppetry. I've resolved the other part, with Miles' help, and I will no longer consult with those who annoy me. You know, that means no moar trolling, 'kay? Thnx, and reply as soon as possible! Blue Ninjakoopa 21:54, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Truly, I am not one that you can blame for trolling. The only other possible way that someone else could possibly have been involved is if they're baiting you. If they are baiting you (and from what I can see on wiki nobody is baiting you), then contact an administrator and do NOT reply to the baiter. Not only can replying result in a block for you, but you lose the "moral high-ground" or so to speak. "Maybe if you told PG and TBB to leave me alone, I wouldn't be so angry!" "The Blue Blur is innocent, so I'll back him up and call BNK a troll!" As far as I can tell, The Blue Blur and Paragoomba are "innocent", and you're trolling them, for what reason I have no idea. This is like the 9001th time you've tried to pass off your anger problems on someone else; I didn't buy it the first time, and I'm not going to buy it now. I'm sorry, but that is the truth.

Doing a quick contribs check produced these results:

• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
• 6
• 7
• 8
• 9
• 10

Well, there you go. I have procured 10 examples of you posting something unnecessarily aggressive, assholish, and/or including personal attacks. I had to go back only 4 days to find them. So, that's 10+ examples of trolling in 4 days, and 8 of those have occured in the past 2. Do you see the problem here? :(

(I also do not see the accusations of sockpuppetry you’re talking about. Can you give me some links?)

Finally...I do not wish to come across as rude or condescending with this last comment, so I hope you will forgive me, as I deem it necessary in order to speak the truth:

To tell the truth, I believe that you've been lucky that neither I nor any other admin has banned you yet. To be frank, some others that I have spoken to are of the opinion that if someone bans you again, it ought to be lengthened to a permaban. We've been through this whole trolling stuff several times before, and you've never seemed to understand. The reason I personally haven't banned you is that I see a sincere effort to improve yourself (unless you're a very, very good actor who is pulling my leg for the lulz, in which case I bow to your skills). Your record is like a roller coaster - you have ups and downs. Usually, right after a ban or a serious conversation with an admin, your behavior improves. You drop most of the assholish crap and become a decent contributor. However, after a while you reach the top of the hill, and the drop begins - personal attacks etc. become increasingly frequent, until someone steps up and says something to you and/or you get banned again. And then you get back on the ride again...

I have chosen to excuse you for the recent offenses (though if another administrator does not, I won't contest their decision). In other words, I will not ban you right now, though another admin may. I truly do believe that you're not editing in bad faith or being an ass on purpose. But honestly, I won't be able to keep excusing you for much longer; one way or another, this behavior has to stop for good. --Shadowcrest 01:36, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

I didn't read the whole thing because I know I'm the one guilty of trolling/making personal attacks, I just wish you'd help me out a little moar. That's all I ask. :( Blue Ninjakoopa 01:43, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Please read the whole thing. When I write a WoT to reply to you and run it past 3 separate people to make sure it comes out good, you can probably assume I'm saying it because it's important. :( --Shadowcrest 01:51, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Okay, I read it. I know I've got everything mixed up; you've been letting me slide all this time. With all the trolling and flaming I've been doing, I could be banned any second. I apologize for attacking you, and hopefully you will forgive me. I never grasped the true definition of trolling fully, so I use the term loosely; act like a hypocrite and label others with the title.At least you know I'm improving (a little), because the old BNK responds to WoTs with cursing and attempts to demote intellect (calling you words such as "stupid" or "idiot", which you clearly are not). Blue Ninjakoopa 02:05, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

I'm just curious...

But i was playing peach earlier on Brawl, and peach bomber does look like she's hitting with her butt, but i could be wrong... ~Teh Blue Blur~^{~You're too slow!~} 17:39, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

It seems to me that, even if she is hitting with her butt (nintendo is a bunch of pervs :]), that most people seem to think it's her hip, and butt (also look at that person's contributions on the Toad article) seems less appropriate than hip does. --Alice 17:53, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

I agree with Alice. Unless Nintendo specifically comes out and says "Peach hits people with her butt", I'd like to keep that stuff out of main as much as possible. Death By Rape is an example of such stuff. Not to mention that IP's contibs on Toad (move) suggest that they are not contributing in good faith. --Shadowcrest 18:07, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Deletion frenzy

While you're having fun with the deleting, please keep the Goombella trophy; that could be used on the List of SSBB trophies page, as soon as I add a new row. Thanks. ;) Friedbeef1 Love 23:13, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

K ppls, I just deleted like 400 images, where's my barnstar --Shadowcrest 00:39, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Alice 00:46, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, shadow. I know I'm pitiful T.T Friedbeef1 Love 01:08, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Uh... what? --Shadowcrest 01:28, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

For keeping the trophy pic; can you do anything about the two videos in Unused Files? Friedbeef1 Love 01:47, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Oh. Sure. And no, I can't... I'm going to ask KyleH next time I see him on IRC. --Shadowcrest 02:11, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

You=monster of deletion. I dubbeth you, Shadowdeletioncrest. Semicolon (talk) 01:53, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

I shall add it to my list of adjectives --Shadowcrest 02:11, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

You didn't check to see if any of them could be useful?... --Sky (t · c · w) 05:27, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

I wish you would've taken the effort to continue clicking the "unused" box; that way people would actually know what the problem was. Now people will have to work harder to discover that. Zixor (talk) 05:38, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Don't worry about it. It truly was a pointless post. I just found it as a strange coincidence. No need to apologize. MarioGalaxy^{May Guthix be with you...} 20:57, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

ban

Can you ban this person please? --Alice 07:19, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

The Talk Page

Not to be mean or anything, but there are some people without a home computer. I am one of them. My school won't let me on most of the sites. This is the only site I can find with the available source. Please consider what you comment before you say stuff that could be hurtful to others. SapphireKirby777 ~Behold! -.- 14:04, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

What are you talking about? --Shadowcrest 16:10, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

You were being an ass on his talk page (no offense) while making fun of my edit count. Blue Ninjakoopa 16:30, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Making fun of people is for trolls, and if you think I'm a troll then just epic lulz.

I had a reason to comment on your edit count, and it was constructive. If you followed my advice about less chatting and more editing, you'd be a better contributor, ye? --Shadowcrest 18:23, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Yeah. <--- Not trolling. Blue Ninjakoopa 19:12, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

"minor" PA

Check out this PA:
http://super-smash-bros.wikia.com/index.php?title=Template_talk:Speedy_Delete&diff=next&oldid=254454
-Zixor (talk) 14:20, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

If that were bannable, pretty much all of the admins would be banned by now. You're welcome to take it up with Sky, but administratively there's nothing I can do about it. --Shadowcrest 15:30, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

So admins can just up and say stuff like that? Blue Ninjakoopa 15:37, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

For once, I agree with BNK. Zixor (talk) 15:59, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I do not mean to say that it's acceptable, but just that if we were to ban our admins for the comments they have made we'd have like 3 admins.

• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
• 6
• 7
• 8
• 9
• 10
• 11
• 12

Things I have to say about this:

• These are all things that I personally find overly aggressive or personal attack-ish.
• [edit] Also note that I do not necessarily disagree with what was the point of the message, I disagree with the manner it was said in.
• I was going to look for more but I'm tired and I got bored. So whatever.
• I am aware that I am not on this list despite others thinking that I should be. I plead the 5th, and if another person wants to go through my contribs and find stuff fine.

Summary: Yeah, I know the admins make personal attacks that (I think) they shouldn't. Hopefully after reading this they'll change. But unless they do something really bad, I'm not going to block them. What would the very few remaining admins do? Take 8 hour shifts? Lol. --Shadowcrest 16:25, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Wow. They're... they're bullies! Blue Ninjakoopa 16:55, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

I am an organized troll, remember. Organized. Semicolon (talk) 19:48, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Heh,
I would have to agree with you entirely (with the exception of SilverDragon's edits [7,8, & 9], which I feel were [generally] accurate and constructive assertions). -Likely nothing any admin has done recently would be considered ban-worthy, but this behavior is entirely unacceptable from any user, and they must be reprimanded. -And this is something I think you should do.

I have added in an afterthought in response. --Shadowcrest 17:04, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

There is virtually no chance that any admin reading this thread would change their ways as a result, as they are all undeniably aware of their poor choices already. Attitudes toward PA's have become disgustingly lax, and must now be renewed. Zixor (talk) 16:58, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

I'd like to point out that my edit above isn't intended to be anything even close to a PA. That's my (not very) humorous edit summary when I correct spelling and grammar errors. I can cease that behavior if some find it offensive -- I only meant it in a joking manner. I would guess many other admins feel the same about some of their edit summaries (I think this is roughly the same idea). Miles (talk) 17:25, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, Miles. -As for the link, I would say that "LOLcat" (whatever it might mean....) is less an insult than a fairly harmless assertion of amusement. Assuming it was written along side an actual explanation, I don't think this would constitute a PA. -Zixor (talk) 17:45, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

(edit conflictAlright, here's my thoughts on the matter. First, there's a big difference between a slight jab and an attack. The comments above fit into the first category (or at least I felt that they did when I was writing them and apologize if they were interpreted differently). An example of a personal "attack" would be something like this or our recent "friend" African American Ninjakoopa (the vandal account). Now, if every little comment about someone not being able to spell properly was considered a banable offense, Shadowcrest is right that we wouldn't have anyone around. Also, there's a difference between just up and telling some one to "fuck off" (unacceptable) and telling them that you don't accept their apology because you think they will continue until they are blocked (acceptable). You were perfectly fine in saying the latter (I'm not passing judgment on if I agree or disagree with you), but under the logic I see you presenting, you would be in fault as the comment could have been the same as "fuck off." Basically, what it boils down to is a matter of how things are taken by all the users. I really haven't seen any uproar from people about the "learn English" comments, and if there was, then there would be discussion about what we should do about them. As for the edit you originally questioned, my advice would be get over it. If one person on the internet calling you an idiot for one thing you did is a big enough deal to cause you emotional turmoil then you life must be pretty good considering you can spare emotional energy to be bothered by something that trivial. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 17:48, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

The difference between a jab and an attack is in severity, not principal: Both are wrong. Though it may at times be quite clear, the severity is generally open to a large amount of interpretation by the readers, and the exact distinction is somewhat unobtainable. (-And, let’s face it, we are all human, and frequently tend ‘’not’’ to assume good faith.) As such, and for other obvious reasons, it would be best simply not to make use of either. Regardless of the size, “every little comment” makes a difference; a negative one, in this case. –and ‘’any’’ amount of uproar is no excuse for this; discussion is happening right now.

Your final two sentences are irrelevant, overly personal, and (most importantly) based on circumstantial and largely imagined evidence.

-Incidentally, when have you ever known me to "get over" anything? I plan to have a nice long chat with you about your own numerous and egregious PA's. -Zixor (talk) 18:12, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

This is weird. Admins doing these things!? This is insane! What do we need to do? SapphireKirby777 ~Behold! -.- 14:32, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm afraid there is nothing we can do -.- Blue Ninjakoopa 16:05, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Jab is a loaded word because it implies that an attack (albeit a small one) is taking place in the first place. Better might be to say that there's a difference between attacking another user and being blunt, which, believe it or not, can actually have a positive impact (meaning that it is, in fact, different in principal from an attack). What you're essentially proposing is that we can analyze the action without analyzing the intent (i.e. you're making the blanket statement that anything resembling an attack in character is automatically wrong/in bad faith/whatever you want to call it). The distinction isn't always clear, but there is a difference. – Defiant Elements +talk 16:47, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

I would agree; though I don't particularly understand what you mean by:"What you're essentially proposing is that we can analyze the action without analyzing the intent (i.e. you're making the blanket statement that anything resembling an attack in character is automatically wrong/in bad faith/whatever you want to call it)."

One can be blunt without being unkind, yes. -Zixor (talk) 17:03, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

You said "The difference between a jab and an attack is in severity, not principal: Both are wrong." "Jabs," if you want to call them that, usually serve one of two purposes. Either they're intended to be funny or they're intended to be blunt. "Attacks" are purposefully aimed at another editor and are inherently non-constructive in nature. By equating "jabs" and "attacks" and saying that both are principally wrong, you're saying that, regardless of intent, anything that resembles an attack to any degree is inherently wrong. Intent matters. – Defiant Elements +talk 17:08, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Well, that wouldn't be my choice of wording. -We simply need to be more mindful of the negative effects of the particular way we say things. Zixor (talk) 17:15, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

And people need to stop taking things so personally and be mature enough to get over them. There was no problem with any of this until you showed up and started whining about it. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 17:20, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Negative effects of what I say=somebody else's problem. My words aren't meant to be hurtful; believe me, when I want to be hurtful, I can be extraordinarily hurtful. This is my matter-of-fact sometimes called my just-shut-the-hell-up tone. It's candid, blunt, and not very forgiving. I am very aware of what my words will do. I am hoping that my words will affect someone in a way that I desire. The way I desire is that the stop/start doing whatever it is I request. I don't do that by pandering. It is neither useful nor my style. I don't do it by not telling the truth about things. I don't do it by being so soft the message doesn't get across. I do it by telling the truth, telling it plainly, and not pulling any punches if I have to. It's not my problem the way these things are taken. I'm doing my job, and that's what's required of me, and all the other sysops and users on this wiki. Semicolon (talk) 17:42, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

-Both of your main points are dead wrong, and the root of the problem. Zixor (talk) 17:52, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Since you seem to think that justifying arguments is pointless, I'll respond with something simple enough for you to understand: "No, you're wrong." Guess what? I've got as much standing here as you, but as of right now, I'm ahead because we actually took the time to justify our reasoning. Please, if you're going to continue this discussion (which I would prefer you didn't) actually take the time to argue, not just assert that you're right. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 18:00, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

I suppose I could copy and paste your arguments and add "not" in front of everything; but I don't think that would please either of us.

So, does that make us even? -or, am I ahead? -How exactly do we keep score? : ) Frankly, I don't know why you even bother arguing against me, as our styles are so obviously incompatible. Why not just let my insufficient arguments fail on their own?

-You've already insulted me several times throughout the course of this conversation. -Zixor (talk) 18:51, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

<sarcasm>You don't keep score, I just win.</sarcasm> Your arguments have already failed for being insufficient. I pointed it out so that maybe you would learn something, but you obviously haven't. Oh, and there's no such thing as "incompatible argument styles." That's what someone who can't argue uses as a cop out against someone who can. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 21:32, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Quoth the South Park: "If you would look at my opponent, he is a Turd Sandwich"--"You're a turd sandwich."--"No, if you would excuse me, sir, you are, in fact, a turd sandwich."--"You're a turd sandwich." Semicolon (talk) 21:36, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

This isn't a game tbh; there is no score.

My response to this argument and indeed this entire topic is: don't be a dick. Intent is important, but so is what you say.

This is the internet; there is no urgency to pretty much anything that this discussion could pertain to. You don't have to respond in a second like you do in real life. So take the time to make sure you're not coming off as a douchebag. Re-read what you write, especially if you're arguing; if you're angry, go jog around the block a couple times before you post something you shouldn't. Also keep in mind that while you may not think you're being a douchebag and that everyone else is, you might be. If you think you're going to say something slightly jerkish just to get even with people who were jerks before, though of course what you're doing isn't half as bad as what they did: you're being just as much of a jerk as they were, if not escalating the douchebaggery past what it already was. Also keep in mind that being a dick is not the same as being impolite/uncivil; though many dicks are impolite and uncivil, you can be a polite dick too. Keep in mind that what you say and how it comes across matters. (I strongly disagree with what semi wrote above- I believe that if you offend someone, unless it's clear the other person is overreacting then you are at least partially at fault.)

But, intent matters too. What DE and Semi said above about intent being important is true, though being my righteous-crusader carebear self my line is a lot shorter than theirs is. If what I'm saying is assholish but it's a joke and everyone knows that, that's ok. If the comment isn't damn clear that it's supposed to be a joke, you should probably rephrase it. If you make a blunt comment that is construed poorly but you're trying to benefit the wiki/its users/whatever... maybe. This is what administrators have discretion for. Does intent excuse a personal attack? Not necessarily, but it is taken into account. Blanket rules- in this case "any unnecessarily blunt comments are PAs and are a bannable offense"- are always stupid.

I guess what I'm really trying to say is be nice if you can. For people on the dickery side of the argument, just because we won't always ban you for minor asshattery doesn't mean it's cool. Don't be harsh unless you have a seriously good reason. I know being nice is a stretch for some people, but suck it up. For people who are offended by every less-than-perfectly-polite comment, QQ less. Not everyone is going to be perfectly nice and sugar-coated all the time, nor do they have to be. Keep in mind that they may have good intentions behind their slightly dickish comment.

Yeah, I'm overly idealistic and realize that not everyone is going to be nice, no matter what. But it trying to meet the ideal really so horrible? --Shadowcrest 20:28, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

For clarification: I'm not saying that I'm not culpable if someone get's pissed off because of my comments. I'm saying it's not my responsibility. I don't go around trying to piss people off, I go around and do my job. If someone is offended by something I said, I can understand it. I'm not the most fuzzy admin around here, but the fact of the matter is, it's their problem if they're pissed about it. It's the internet--if you take personally what happens here, then you're in for a load of hurt when you get into the real world. Sh-t happens. Get over it. Semicolon (talk) 21:39, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, SC. I hope this will help for now, if only a little; and I will take what you've said into consideration. (-btw, what does "QQ" mean?)

-C-Hawk: You continue to insult me at every turn. I have asked you to stop, but you don't. If I'm to understand correctly, this is my problem. -I'll try again to "get over it". -Zixor (talk) 22:59, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Let's play a fun little game. Where are the insults? Semicolon (talk) 23:07, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Oh, I'd badly like to make one against you right now. -Zixor (talk) 23:24, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm giving you a chance to present your case. I'm being charitable--really, I am, because at this point most people who know how to argue would already have shut down and stopped listening, assuming you have no idea what you're talking about. Indulge me; what's your reasoning? Where are the insults? Lay your case down. Argue with us. Please. I'm not gonna give you another chance, because I already assume, based on most of your edits, that you have no reasoning, no logic, no case, evidence etc., but I'm willing to revise my assessment this one last time.Semicolon (talk) 04:57, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

That's nice. Did you know that false claims such as accusing him of personal attacks are libel? Additionally, you say above "C-hawk:You continue to insult me...", but the problem is you talked to C-Hawk while replying to semicolon. --Shadowcrest 23:31, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Encouraging personal attacks violates NPA, doesn't it? -hopes not- Blue Ninjakoopa 23:29, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

I wouldn't say so, though it could be construed as baiting. --Shadowcrest 23:31, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

I thought it was clear that I intended to end this conversation, which is what you and C-Hawk wanted, but very well. I'm not particularly interested in your charity, nor in indulging you. I suppose I can, however, humor you.

I'm of the mind that people generally don't acknowledge that which they disagree with; therefore, I would think that you are actually aware of what I perceive as an insult, futilely deterring me from pointing it out specifically. -But let's try it out anyway:

You said, "Let's play a fun little game". This is the kind of thing one would say to a child. When I'm treated as a child, I am insulted. This should've been clear from my hostile reaction. Based on examples within this thread, it should also be clear ("based on most of my edits") that my responses are far more intelligible when I am treated with respect and dignity. If you wished to illicit such a response, why did you not treat me in a polite manner? (This would be an example of "incompatible argument styles")

I am frequently accused of "bad" arguing (by C-Hawk), which is a naive view, as it is perhaps merely "different". Simply because I choose not to point out "evidence" or "logic" which can be easily extrapolated based on what I have said, you say that I am without reasoning; when, in fact, I have simply not always yet stated it as such specifically. I would imagine that you already know this, but simply choose to argue your way around it.

At that point, I would perhaps usually elaborate on the point in question, but (when talking to you or C-Hawk) there has usually been a deterrent (insult, tangent, etc.) which I might choose to address first, or ignore entirely as it hardly discounts what I've written.

This is all part of my argument, and while my methods may be in question, there should be none as to whether or not I have any idea what I'm talking about.

-Regarding you comment, SC; I am unsure why you meant by "liability", nor why you thought I was replying to Semi. -Zixor (talk) 06:16, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

I thought you were replying to Semi because you quoted something of his in a response you addressed to C.Hawk.

I didn't say liability, I said libel. They're not even close to the same thing. --Shadowcrest 14:27, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

OK, just no to the argumentation point. Look, there are books on how to reason and argue effectively, and highly established methods and standards for the art. I wasn't a high school debate champion and a standout political science student because I chose not to present evidence or construct logical link stories. Also, don't let your opponents extrapolate the evidence for you. They will either extrapolate it in a way you didn't intend them to or they will (rightly) present the fact that you haven't presented any evidence as their primary counter-argument. This is basic rhetoric. Please, show me the scholarly writing that defends the "style" of argumentation that doesn't use logic, doesn't present evidence, and accepts appeals to emotion and continual reassertation of debunked claims. Oh wait, it doesn't exist. As for things being "inherently" obvious, the burden of proof is still on you under the rules of rhetoric. I don't question that you have an idea of what you are talking about. I question the validity of it. Asserting that you believe something is great. It's a self proving hypothesis. It also does nothing, absolutely nothing, to help the question of if what you believe is true. In the case of the normative argument, showing that X should be true does not prove that it is true. I attack your argumentation methods no longer out of any desire to help you (that ship has long since sailed) but instead to help bolster my position in this by not only providing a strong case against you, but also proving that your case doesn't even have standing in the argument. It's called a multiple win situation. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 06:40, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm going to chime in here too, if you don't mind. I said 'Let's play a little game' as a challenge. I don't think you have jack, tbh. And in my defense, you're arguing like a child. That isn't a statement meant to insult; it's factual. You are repeatedly asserting what you say, and providing no evidence. You're saying 'Because' and that's your reasoning. I'm sorry, I think I heard my 7 year old cousin use that last, tbh.

As far as your respect and dignity goes, you're saying that to try and put the blame for your marginal contributions on me. I'm sorry, your edits are your own responsibility. You haven't been abused on this wiki, particularly not at the start, but after some time your edits were called into question because they were repeatedly of the 'nonconstructive' variety, and once again tbh, they were sort of annoying. That means usually that an admin has a chat with you about it, and you get the picture. Clearly, this case has not turned out to be such.

I have been polite to you. I'm being polite right now. I'm not insulting you, I'm just being direct and honest. I said that you were arguing like a child...nyuuhh--because you were arguing like a child--literally. As C-Hawk has thoroughly explained, there are two types of argument styles: one that works and makes sense, and one that doesn't. You're using the one that doesn't. Semicolon (talk) 06:55, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Email

It was regarding African American Ninjakoopa. He's long been taken care of. THank you anyway. Toon Ganondorf (t c)

"minor" PA

Check out this PA:
http://super-smash-bros.wikia.com/index.php?title=Template_talk:Speedy_Delete&diff=next&oldid=254454
-Zixor (talk) 14:20, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

If that were bannable, pretty much all of the admins would be banned by now. You're welcome to take it up with Sky, but administratively there's nothing I can do about it. --Shadowcrest 15:30, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

So admins can just up and say stuff like that? Blue Ninjakoopa 15:37, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

For once, I agree with BNK. Zixor (talk) 15:59, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I do not mean to say that it's acceptable, but just that if we were to ban our admins for the comments they have made we'd have like 3 admins.

• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
• 6
• 7
• 8
• 9
• 10
• 11
• 12

Things I have to say about this:

• These are all things that I personally find overly aggressive or personal attack-ish.
• [edit] Also note that I do not necessarily disagree with what was the point of the message, I disagree with the manner it was said in.
• I was going to look for more but I'm tired and I got bored. So whatever.
• I am aware that I am not on this list despite others thinking that I should be. I plead the 5th, and if another person wants to go through my contribs and find stuff fine.

Summary: Yeah, I know the admins make personal attacks that (I think) they shouldn't. Hopefully after reading this they'll change. But unless they do something really bad, I'm not going to block them. What would the very few remaining admins do? Take 8 hour shifts? Lol. --Shadowcrest 16:25, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Wow. They're... they're bullies! Blue Ninjakoopa 16:55, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

I am an organized troll, remember. Organized. Semicolon (talk) 19:48, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Heh,
I would have to agree with you entirely (with the exception of SilverDragon's edits [7,8, & 9], which I feel were [generally] accurate and constructive assertions). -Likely nothing any admin has done recently would be considered ban-worthy, but this behavior is entirely unacceptable from any user, and they must be reprimanded. -And this is something I think you should do.

I have added in an afterthought in response. --Shadowcrest 17:04, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

There is virtually no chance that any admin reading this thread would change their ways as a result, as they are all undeniably aware of their poor choices already. Attitudes toward PA's have become disgustingly lax, and must now be renewed. Zixor (talk) 16:58, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

I'd like to point out that my edit above isn't intended to be anything even close to a PA. That's my (not very) humorous edit summary when I correct spelling and grammar errors. I can cease that behavior if some find it offensive -- I only meant it in a joking manner. I would guess many other admins feel the same about some of their edit summaries (I think this is roughly the same idea). Miles (talk) 17:25, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, Miles. -As for the link, I would say that "LOLcat" (whatever it might mean....) is less an insult than a fairly harmless assertion of amusement. Assuming it was written along side an actual explanation, I don't think this would constitute a PA. -Zixor (talk) 17:45, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

(edit conflictAlright, here's my thoughts on the matter. First, there's a big difference between a slight jab and an attack. The comments above fit into the first category (or at least I felt that they did when I was writing them and apologize if they were interpreted differently). An example of a personal "attack" would be something like this or our recent "friend" African American Ninjakoopa (the vandal account). Now, if every little comment about someone not being able to spell properly was considered a banable offense, Shadowcrest is right that we wouldn't have anyone around. Also, there's a difference between just up and telling some one to "fuck off" (unacceptable) and telling them that you don't accept their apology because you think they will continue until they are blocked (acceptable). You were perfectly fine in saying the latter (I'm not passing judgment on if I agree or disagree with you), but under the logic I see you presenting, you would be in fault as the comment could have been the same as "fuck off." Basically, what it boils down to is a matter of how things are taken by all the users. I really haven't seen any uproar from people about the "learn English" comments, and if there was, then there would be discussion about what we should do about them. As for the edit you originally questioned, my advice would be get over it. If one person on the internet calling you an idiot for one thing you did is a big enough deal to cause you emotional turmoil then you life must be pretty good considering you can spare emotional energy to be bothered by something that trivial. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 17:48, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

The difference between a jab and an attack is in severity, not principal: Both are wrong. Though it may at times be quite clear, the severity is generally open to a large amount of interpretation by the readers, and the exact distinction is somewhat unobtainable. (-And, let’s face it, we are all human, and frequently tend ‘’not’’ to assume good faith.) As such, and for other obvious reasons, it would be best simply not to make use of either. Regardless of the size, “every little comment” makes a difference; a negative one, in this case. –and ‘’any’’ amount of uproar is no excuse for this; discussion is happening right now.

Your final two sentences are irrelevant, overly personal, and (most importantly) based on circumstantial and largely imagined evidence.

-Incidentally, when have you ever known me to "get over" anything? I plan to have a nice long chat with you about your own numerous and egregious PA's. -Zixor (talk) 18:12, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

This is weird. Admins doing these things!? This is insane! What do we need to do? SapphireKirby777 ~Behold! -.- 14:32, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm afraid there is nothing we can do -.- Blue Ninjakoopa 16:05, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Jab is a loaded word because it implies that an attack (albeit a small one) is taking place in the first place. Better might be to say that there's a difference between attacking another user and being blunt, which, believe it or not, can actually have a positive impact (meaning that it is, in fact, different in principal from an attack). What you're essentially proposing is that we can analyze the action without analyzing the intent (i.e. you're making the blanket statement that anything resembling an attack in character is automatically wrong/in bad faith/whatever you want to call it). The distinction isn't always clear, but there is a difference. – Defiant Elements +talk 16:47, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

I would agree; though I don't particularly understand what you mean by:"What you're essentially proposing is that we can analyze the action without analyzing the intent (i.e. you're making the blanket statement that anything resembling an attack in character is automatically wrong/in bad faith/whatever you want to call it)."

One can be blunt without being unkind, yes. -Zixor (talk) 17:03, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

You said "The difference between a jab and an attack is in severity, not principal: Both are wrong." "Jabs," if you want to call them that, usually serve one of two purposes. Either they're intended to be funny or they're intended to be blunt. "Attacks" are purposefully aimed at another editor and are inherently non-constructive in nature. By equating "jabs" and "attacks" and saying that both are principally wrong, you're saying that, regardless of intent, anything that resembles an attack to any degree is inherently wrong. Intent matters. – Defiant Elements +talk 17:08, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Well, that wouldn't be my choice of wording. -We simply need to be more mindful of the negative effects of the particular way we say things. Zixor (talk) 17:15, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

And people need to stop taking things so personally and be mature enough to get over them. There was no problem with any of this until you showed up and started whining about it. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 17:20, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Negative effects of what I say=somebody else's problem. My words aren't meant to be hurtful; believe me, when I want to be hurtful, I can be extraordinarily hurtful. This is my matter-of-fact sometimes called my just-shut-the-hell-up tone. It's candid, blunt, and not very forgiving. I am very aware of what my words will do. I am hoping that my words will affect someone in a way that I desire. The way I desire is that the stop/start doing whatever it is I request. I don't do that by pandering. It is neither useful nor my style. I don't do it by not telling the truth about things. I don't do it by being so soft the message doesn't get across. I do it by telling the truth, telling it plainly, and not pulling any punches if I have to. It's not my problem the way these things are taken. I'm doing my job, and that's what's required of me, and all the other sysops and users on this wiki. Semicolon (talk) 17:42, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

-Both of your main points are dead wrong, and the root of the problem. Zixor (talk) 17:52, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Since you seem to think that justifying arguments is pointless, I'll respond with something simple enough for you to understand: "No, you're wrong." Guess what? I've got as much standing here as you, but as of right now, I'm ahead because we actually took the time to justify our reasoning. Please, if you're going to continue this discussion (which I would prefer you didn't) actually take the time to argue, not just assert that you're right. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 18:00, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

I suppose I could copy and paste your arguments and add "not" in front of everything; but I don't think that would please either of us.

So, does that make us even? -or, am I ahead? -How exactly do we keep score? : ) Frankly, I don't know why you even bother arguing against me, as our styles are so obviously incompatible. Why not just let my insufficient arguments fail on their own?

-You've already insulted me several times throughout the course of this conversation. -Zixor (talk) 18:51, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

<sarcasm>You don't keep score, I just win.</sarcasm> Your arguments have already failed for being insufficient. I pointed it out so that maybe you would learn something, but you obviously haven't. Oh, and there's no such thing as "incompatible argument styles." That's what someone who can't argue uses as a cop out against someone who can. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 21:32, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Quoth the South Park: "If you would look at my opponent, he is a Turd Sandwich"--"You're a turd sandwich."--"No, if you would excuse me, sir, you are, in fact, a turd sandwich."--"You're a turd sandwich." Semicolon (talk) 21:36, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

This isn't a game tbh; there is no score.

My response to this argument and indeed this entire topic is: don't be a dick. Intent is important, but so is what you say.

This is the internet; there is no urgency to pretty much anything that this discussion could pertain to. You don't have to respond in a second like you do in real life. So take the time to make sure you're not coming off as a douchebag. Re-read what you write, especially if you're arguing; if you're angry, go jog around the block a couple times before you post something you shouldn't. Also keep in mind that while you may not think you're being a douchebag and that everyone else is, you might be. If you think you're going to say something slightly jerkish just to get even with people who were jerks before, though of course what you're doing isn't half as bad as what they did: you're being just as much of a jerk as they were, if not escalating the douchebaggery past what it already was. Also keep in mind that being a dick is not the same as being impolite/uncivil; though many dicks are impolite and uncivil, you can be a polite dick too. Keep in mind that what you say and how it comes across matters. (I strongly disagree with what semi wrote above- I believe that if you offend someone, unless it's clear the other person is overreacting then you are at least partially at fault.)

But, intent matters too. What DE and Semi said above about intent being important is true, though being my righteous-crusader carebear self my line is a lot shorter than theirs is. If what I'm saying is assholish but it's a joke and everyone knows that, that's ok. If the comment isn't damn clear that it's supposed to be a joke, you should probably rephrase it. If you make a blunt comment that is construed poorly but you're trying to benefit the wiki/its users/whatever... maybe. This is what administrators have discretion for. Does intent excuse a personal attack? Not necessarily, but it is taken into account. Blanket rules- in this case "any unnecessarily blunt comments are PAs and are a bannable offense"- are always stupid.

I guess what I'm really trying to say is be nice if you can. For people on the dickery side of the argument, just because we won't always ban you for minor asshattery doesn't mean it's cool. Don't be harsh unless you have a seriously good reason. I know being nice is a stretch for some people, but suck it up. For people who are offended by every less-than-perfectly-polite comment, QQ less. Not everyone is going to be perfectly nice and sugar-coated all the time, nor do they have to be. Keep in mind that they may have good intentions behind their slightly dickish comment.

Yeah, I'm overly idealistic and realize that not everyone is going to be nice, no matter what. But it trying to meet the ideal really so horrible? --Shadowcrest 20:28, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

For clarification: I'm not saying that I'm not culpable if someone get's pissed off because of my comments. I'm saying it's not my responsibility. I don't go around trying to piss people off, I go around and do my job. If someone is offended by something I said, I can understand it. I'm not the most fuzzy admin around here, but the fact of the matter is, it's their problem if they're pissed about it. It's the internet--if you take personally what happens here, then you're in for a load of hurt when you get into the real world. Sh-t happens. Get over it. Semicolon (talk) 21:39, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, SC. I hope this will help for now, if only a little; and I will take what you've said into consideration. (-btw, what does "QQ" mean?)

-C-Hawk: You continue to insult me at every turn. I have asked you to stop, but you don't. If I'm to understand correctly, this is my problem. -I'll try again to "get over it". -Zixor (talk) 22:59, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Let's play a fun little game. Where are the insults? Semicolon (talk) 23:07, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Oh, I'd badly like to make one against you right now. -Zixor (talk) 23:24, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm giving you a chance to present your case. I'm being charitable--really, I am, because at this point most people who know how to argue would already have shut down and stopped listening, assuming you have no idea what you're talking about. Indulge me; what's your reasoning? Where are the insults? Lay your case down. Argue with us. Please. I'm not gonna give you another chance, because I already assume, based on most of your edits, that you have no reasoning, no logic, no case, evidence etc., but I'm willing to revise my assessment this one last time.Semicolon (talk) 04:57, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

That's nice. Did you know that false claims such as accusing him of personal attacks are libel? Additionally, you say above "C-hawk:You continue to insult me...", but the problem is you talked to C-Hawk while replying to semicolon. --Shadowcrest 23:31, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Encouraging personal attacks violates NPA, doesn't it? -hopes not- Blue Ninjakoopa 23:29, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

I wouldn't say so, though it could be construed as baiting. --Shadowcrest 23:31, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

I thought it was clear that I intended to end this conversation, which is what you and C-Hawk wanted, but very well. I'm not particularly interested in your charity, nor in indulging you. I suppose I can, however, humor you.

I'm of the mind that people generally don't acknowledge that which they disagree with; therefore, I would think that you are actually aware of what I perceive as an insult, futilely deterring me from pointing it out specifically. -But let's try it out anyway:

You said, "Let's play a fun little game". This is the kind of thing one would say to a child. When I'm treated as a child, I am insulted. This should've been clear from my hostile reaction. Based on examples within this thread, it should also be clear ("based on most of my edits") that my responses are far more intelligible when I am treated with respect and dignity. If you wished to illicit such a response, why did you not treat me in a polite manner? (This would be an example of "incompatible argument styles")

I am frequently accused of "bad" arguing (by C-Hawk), which is a naive view, as it is perhaps merely "different". Simply because I choose not to point out "evidence" or "logic" which can be easily extrapolated based on what I have said, you say that I am without reasoning; when, in fact, I have simply not always yet stated it as such specifically. I would imagine that you already know this, but simply choose to argue your way around it.

At that point, I would perhaps usually elaborate on the point in question, but (when talking to you or C-Hawk) there has usually been a deterrent (insult, tangent, etc.) which I might choose to address first, or ignore entirely as it hardly discounts what I've written.

This is all part of my argument, and while my methods may be in question, there should be none as to whether or not I have any idea what I'm talking about.

-Regarding you comment, SC; I am unsure why you meant by "liability", nor why you thought I was replying to Semi. -Zixor (talk) 06:16, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

I thought you were replying to Semi because you quoted something of his in a response you addressed to C.Hawk.

I didn't say liability, I said libel. They're not even close to the same thing. --Shadowcrest 14:27, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

OK, just no to the argumentation point. Look, there are books on how to reason and argue effectively, and highly established methods and standards for the art. I wasn't a high school debate champion and a standout political science student because I chose not to present evidence or construct logical link stories. Also, don't let your opponents extrapolate the evidence for you. They will either extrapolate it in a way you didn't intend them to or they will (rightly) present the fact that you haven't presented any evidence as their primary counter-argument. This is basic rhetoric. Please, show me the scholarly writing that defends the "style" of argumentation that doesn't use logic, doesn't present evidence, and accepts appeals to emotion and continual reassertation of debunked claims. Oh wait, it doesn't exist. As for things being "inherently" obvious, the burden of proof is still on you under the rules of rhetoric. I don't question that you have an idea of what you are talking about. I question the validity of it. Asserting that you believe something is great. It's a self proving hypothesis. It also does nothing, absolutely nothing, to help the question of if what you believe is true. In the case of the normative argument, showing that X should be true does not prove that it is true. I attack your argumentation methods no longer out of any desire to help you (that ship has long since sailed) but instead to help bolster my position in this by not only providing a strong case against you, but also proving that your case doesn't even have standing in the argument. It's called a multiple win situation. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 06:40, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm going to chime in here too, if you don't mind. I said 'Let's play a little game' as a challenge. I don't think you have jack, tbh. And in my defense, you're arguing like a child. That isn't a statement meant to insult; it's factual. You are repeatedly asserting what you say, and providing no evidence. You're saying 'Because' and that's your reasoning. I'm sorry, I think I heard my 7 year old cousin use that last, tbh.

As far as your respect and dignity goes, you're saying that to try and put the blame for your marginal contributions on me. I'm sorry, your edits are your own responsibility. You haven't been abused on this wiki, particularly not at the start, but after some time your edits were called into question because they were repeatedly of the 'nonconstructive' variety, and once again tbh, they were sort of annoying. That means usually that an admin has a chat with you about it, and you get the picture. Clearly, this case has not turned out to be such.

I have been polite to you. I'm being polite right now. I'm not insulting you, I'm just being direct and honest. I said that you were arguing like a child...nyuuhh--because you were arguing like a child--literally. As C-Hawk has thoroughly explained, there are two types of argument styles: one that works and makes sense, and one that doesn't. You're using the one that doesn't. Semicolon (talk) 06:55, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

I understand what Clarinet Hawk is doing. I misspelled "aggressive." What Clarinet Hawk is doing is perfectly logical. He is trying to prevent embarassing grammar errors. If you look at his contributions, you can see what I mean. SapphireKirby777---I'm a leprechaun! -.- 19:53, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Wow.. seeing all of this is making me stay away from this site even more now... Friedbeef1Screech 23:32, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

You're really late. --Shadowcrest 23:44, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

birthday

Hope your B-day goes well. --~The Blue Blur~^{New main in training!} 19:49, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

School will ruin it, but I appreciate the gesture <3 --Shadowcrest 20:19, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

It's your birthday, happy? ; ) -Zixor (talk) 21:13, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Well so far my day has been relatively horrible, but it wasn't as bad as I expected. Thanks <3 --Shadowcrest 21:18, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Mine is going similarly. : ) -Zixor (talk) 21:30, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Your Name?

Something's wrong I think. Check this and this. SapphireKirby777---I'm a leprechaun! -.- 19:23, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Salad is a shoepuppet of mine used for testing purposes. --Shadowcrest 19:26, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry to ask, but whats a shoepuppet? SapphireKirby777---I'm a leprechaun! -.- 19:28, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

It's like a sockpuppet, but without the negative connotation of one. You basically just use them to test stuff. --Shadowcrest 19:29, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Oh, I see. By the way, happy birthday (early b-day). SapphireKirby777---I'm a leprechaun! -.- 19:31, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

It's today actually, guess I need to update my message... thanks <3 --Shadowcrest 19:34, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

irc

less afk pls Blue Ninjakoopa 21:42, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

He can be afk as much as he wants. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 21:15, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

1. You're slow
2. He needed to tell me something :P --Shadowcrest 21:18, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

question

What happened to your page? [Image:My_signature!.gif|50px]] (U-T-C) 20:22, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm tired of comments like this. It is not, (afaik) never has been, and never will be (at least as long as I'm around) against any rules (whether formal or informal) to ask a question. I'm tired of being treated like someone on a pedestal. I'm a person, not a god. (Yes, this may come as a shock considering how amazing I am, but it's true.) --Shadowcrest 20:27, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Okay... But what's that got to do with the original question? —Preceding unsigned comment added by The Blue Blur (talk • contribs) 20:30, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

It's important enough to me to warrant a noticeable message such as this. --Shadowcrest 20:36, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

I guess... (Sorry if i'm spamming your page with these images...) Anyways, I g2g in a sec. If you want to, we can continue this convo tommorow. [Image:My_signature!.gif|50px]] (U-T-C) 20:38, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

irc

is bugging out. I can't join. We'll finish this later. Sorry. Semicolon (talk) 23:33, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

No problem... I should have started homework hours ago anyway. :p --Shadowcrest 23:34, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

That one user again

Here is what you and I put on CH's talk page. I'm putting it here to avoid fragmented conversation: "Hi. I have looked at this user's contributions, and maybe it's because I absoultely HATE Jigglypuff, but it seems to me that he/she is biased for Jigglypuff. I wouldn't call him/her a vandal (that's why I didn't put this on the vandal section) because he/she doesn't replace articles with "GAY GAY GAY" or anything like that, but I do think this user needs a warning or something like that to quit making Jiggly seem like the best character ever no matter what it takes. However, he/she may just be a normal user. I can't tell because I'm biased against YOU FAIL!. That's why I wanted a second opinion. Enigmatic Mr. L (talk) 00:05, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

I'd agf that one. Maybe explain to him that reverting the same comments over and over again isn't allowed, but otherwise he looks like a good-faith editor. --Shadowcrest 01:59, 1 April 2009 (UTC)"

Now things are really out of hand. Just look at the history on the Jigglypuff (SSBB) page. I'd say something to Phayz but the last time I did that he didn't even respond. Maybe you could say something to him for me? Unless of course I was the wrong one in the history of that article, in which case please explain to me what I did wrong. --Enigmatic Mr. L (talk) 21:15, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Hello! Sorry to be a nuisance. But i just felt the attributes article was too long, a have merely reworded it an a shorter, i only removed one piece of information about projectiles, cos that conflicted with an earlier statement. oh and i felt that you needed to explain what you meant by "hurt by brawl's new physics". Phayz (talk) 21:20, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Engaging in an edit war is highly unproductive. While I don't claim to speak for Shadowcrest, I would suggest that the two of you work this out rather than continuing to merely reverse each other's edits. – Defiant Elements +talk 21:33, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Done and done, Defiant Elements. --Enigmatic Mr. L (talk) 01:04, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Why?

Why did you delete my talk page? FyreNWater (talk) 20:39, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Disregard the faker. SD706/FnW - (U•T•C ) 00:08, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

I believe the page was deleted because another user had created it by mistake. Toomai Glittershine The Table Designer 21:04, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi

• [2]

Do you know where that came from? Blue Ninjakoopa 01:32, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Solution. Blue Ninjakoopa 01:42, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

irc

want.Smoreking^(T) _(c) 01:39, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Is this you?

→ moved to User talk:GT5162

Your block of me

Dear Shadowcrest

This is Sir Evan Tidalwave Schroedur, Esquire, who you better know as 13375poolR. You have blocked me, for what I believe to be unjust reasons. You blocked me for 'intimidating behavior/harassment.' I am using a different IP because you refused to let me edit my own talk page, unjustly, as well. I have not 'harassed' anyone, or intimidated anyone. I would retract this if you can find anyone, anyone who can come forward saying that they have been harassed by me in an intimidating manner, but I am sure you cannot. You seem to have a personal dislike for my continued interjections of humorous (and true) anecdotes, as well for the instances where I have in fact provided true and helpful answers in these anecdotes. Please unblock me, shorten my block, or consult other admins about this block, because it is tyranny, sir, and as I shouted with others those many years ago, 'Taxation without representation is tyranny.' Sincerely, Sir Evan Tidalwave Shroedur, or 13375poolR. 74.63.87.134 00:10, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Well obviously your problem is that the temperature on SmashWiki only exceeds 10% humidity, so you can't become a yipnik. So sorry.

I unjustly restricted use of your talk page? Not really. I don't really see why that was ever implemented in the first place- blocked users aren't supposed to be able to edit the wiki, not the wiki minus their talk page. But that's still not the point- I left email open for a reason, use it.

"I have not 'harassed' anyone, or intimidated anyone." I selected the closest applicable wiki-generated reason, and if that caused you confusion then I apologize. However, I suggest you look at the second part of the block reason, "trolling", and if we're going even more in depth I would have added "disruption". So while you may be correct that I may not find anyone who was personally offended by your posts (though btw, you've done it before), I am correct that I am well within my rights to block for disruption.

"You seem to have a personal dislike for my continued interjections of humorous (and true) anecdotes" Yeah, I dislike them. They're most typically annoying and divert the subject from its intended topic. But apparently I'm not the only one- other people seem to agree.

"as well for the instances where I have in fact provided true and helpful answers in these anecdotes" Cool story bro. But that doesn't change the fact that your posts were disruptive. If I answer someone's question and then proceed to rant about how they're a dumbass for not knowing, does that make me not guilty of personal attacks? No.

"Please unblock me, shorten my block, or consult other admins about this block." In my opinion, you don't deserve it. You've been given multiple warnings on your talkpage and been blocked for this twice and you continued the behavior. We've done our best to make it exceedingly obvious that you need to stop what you're doing, and the only fault in this situation is on you for missing that. And it's only tyranny if I have absolute control and I'm abusing my power- and neither are true. You are welcome to ask the other admins to shorten the block, but they'd still have to discuss it with me and read this discussion, so it's probably not happening.

Have a nice day,

Shadowcrest 02:56, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

While I'm not going to shorten the block for the reason of 'general douchebaggery' I would like to point something out to you, Shadowcrest. 13375poolR is far less disruptive than the character page vandal. In fact, he's made some constructive edits, and answered questions, albeit in some very peculiar and often cryptically laced with the not so subtle undertones of the influence of hallucinogens. The character page vandal did nothing but be more disruptive to the actual content of the wiki, rather than just troll the forums mildly with his inane babblings. And I'd also like to point out that his intentions don't seem to be nefarious, he just seems to be a bored idiot with a keyboard who decided to mash together historical events with no particular order or sense applied to them. Other vandals, who you are quite squeamish about giving their due have no such clarity of their intentions. It would seem even less to me like he's really even being that disruptive; most often he's simply ignored, which he seems perfectly fine with. He doesn't really flame, with the only possible exception being the 'slug king' reference, but I honestly don't find that to be offensive so much as humorous. My point being is that 13375poolR is nowhere near as bad as they come, because he's at least got a sense of humor, and isn't ruining anyone's day unless you let him. But I'm not unreasonable. You have been a bad bad little troll at times, and yes, you can be exceedingly annoying, and you don't exactly contribute anything, so I'm not shortening the ban, but let's have some understandings, here. Semicolon (talk) 06:50, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

It is certainly clear that this person desires little other than self amusement by way of irrelevant, nonsensical rants, which are generally laden with unacceptable and inappropriate behavior. They are guilty.

Considering this, and though I know you are a polite and considerate person, I'm somewhat surprised that you've continued to treat them with such respect, offering in-depth answers to (in reality) fairly shallow questions. -Still, one should hardly criticize you for this.-Zixor (talk) 16:53, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

"I'd like to say the same thing, but that would be repetitive." Miles (talk) 17:04, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Tl;dr (whatever that means) version of everything said right now: 13375poolr, you gave us a laugh, but you do nothing but post nonsensical, inappropriate, and overall unnecessary rants on otherwise serious forums. Start being a good contributor, and you might not get banned again.L33t Silvie ^{Your epidermis is showing.} 20:06, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Your RfB

Shouldn't you have a link to it on your page? That might be why it's lain dormant for about a week now.L33t Silvie ^{Your epidermis is showing.} 20:33, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

I was srs

On the IRC. Next time I'm in there, I think we need to have a chat. Semicolon (talk) 21:45, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Sorry 'bout that, I went to dinner and forgot I was on. We still need to have this chat, but I hope next time you come with a little more open-mindedness than you displayed in the IRC. Semicolon (talk) 23:32, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

block length discussion

← conversation moved from User talk:151.199.155.94

Can you unblock me, the block is taking forever in this wiki...--151.199.155.94 10:36, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Guess what, one month in the same anywhere. Shut up and enjoy your block. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 16:45, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Oh, and in case that wasn't clear enough, the answer is no. Times one hundred million. And when you come back on this IP and vandalize when your block expires, I will block you for 11 million years. Semicolon (talk) 16:49, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

OK, I think he gets it Semicolon (just say infinite and let it rest; doesn't make a difference). MarioGalaxy^{May Guthix be with you...} 16:51, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Because of Shadowcrest's somewhat irrational staunch opposition to permanent bans, and with the intention to respect his opinion on the matter, I think 11 million years is appropriate and functionally the same as an infinite ban. Plus, it's more fun, and colorful. Semicolon (talk) 18:44, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Um, I don't think Sysops are supposed to enjoy banning users, IPs, etc. But I'm not one, so I don't know. But hey, it's your call (as for what this IP's asking from me, forget it; this guy never leaves me alone on any of his sockpuppets). MarioGalaxy^{May Guthix be with you...} 20:26, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Do you really think that changing infinite to <x> years is respecting my opinion? And yes, MG, we're not supposed to enjoy banning. --Shadowcrest 20:46, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Where does it say I shouldn't enjoy blocking, and no, I don't. Semicolon (talk) 21:18, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

That's called "banhappy", and apparently I fail to see the point of your message then. --Shadowcrest 21:33, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

I believe 'banhappy' refers to someone who blocks unnecessarily for his own amusement. I block necessarily, and am amused when I do it. Check my blocks. They've been justified. And perhaps, in regards the other thing, your failure is in presuming there was a point. Semicolon (talk) 22:27, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, you need to state less opinions, because I feel that a number of your blocks have been unwarranted. So zzz. --Shadowcrest 22:58, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

And I think a number of your non-blocks have been unwarranted. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 23:33, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Um, what? Then you're wrong. End of story. And even if, if, they have been, your argument is that I am 'banhappy' which as has been defined means that I block unnecessarily and for my own amusement. I can simply counter this if you manage to somehow prove that they are unnecessary (which I contend isn't possible) by saying that I was not amused during those particular blocks you deem to be unnecessary, so basically what I'm saying is that you have no way to prove what it is you are imagining, so you should just give it a rest. Semicolon (talk) 23:35, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Clarinet Hawk, I'm not quite sure what you're talking about, because the problem here isn't whether I would have blocked the person that Semicolon blocked, it's whether I would have blocked them for the same time. I can only think of 1 time in recent memory when Semi blocked someone I wouldn't have, so your comment doesn't really apply at all.

Do you find it humorous that you just declared my opinion wrong, semicolon? Because I do.

I wasn't calling you banhappy. I was replying specifically to "Check my blocks. They've been justified." I disagree; I feel that multiple have been unjust, specifically because of the length. So honestly, what was that above paragraph referring to? I'm having trouble determining relevance. --Shadowcrest 00:11, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

If you can't find out what I was talking about, I don't have time to explain it to you. Figure it out. Semicolon (talk) 00:14, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

I can't believe I'm saying this, but you guys are using a blocked IP's talk page to argue over something unimportant. Go argue on the IRC. Cheezperson {talk}stuff 00:19, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Owned. Blue Ninjakoopa 00:21, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Well obviously you do have time- if I may quote you, "<semicolon> i think that arguing is fun; it's not trouble for me, i enjoy it." So really I don't think that's what the issue is here. And you missed the point again; I am not saying that I can't understand what you were saying, I'm saying that I missed how your above paragraph applies in any way to my last response, since you're arguing a point that isn't relevant. Again, the issue is not whether the people should have been blocked, it's how long they should have been blocked for, which your paragraph really has nothing to do with. --Shadowcrest 00:22, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

No, I don't. I have a take home final due tomorrow that's stressing me out and I have a final at 730 in the morning. Stop contradicting me if you have no clue what you're talking about. Semicolon (talk) 00:41, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Then stop contradicting yourself. And by the way, do remember we're on a wiki- you have days to respond to something before it dies, so to speak. --Shadowcrest 00:43, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

1. When I said you're wrong, I said you are wrong to feel that way. Not that an opinion is wrong. That's obvious. I can't fathom what else you could not be understanding about this. And I'm not contradicting myself. Semicolon (talk) 02:51, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

And you are qualified to declare my feelings (→ my opinions) wrong because?...

You are contradicting yourself. Does it or does it not trouble you to argue with me? More quotes from you: "<semicolon> that's not really in my interest, now is it? my interest is in seeing what i think to be right exercised. if that means that you need to write walls of text to defend yourself, and you don't like that, then i have the advantage, don't i?" Pick one and stick with it please.

There is obviously some miscommunication going on, because you seem as dense to me as I seem to you right now. What do you think we're arguing about? I'm arguing against infinite blocks and that some of your blocks have been unjust because they have been too long. What are you arguing about? --Shadowcrest 19:26, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

If you see that as an opinion, then yes. I'm telling you that your opinion is wrong, just like you're telling me that my opinion that they are appropriate in length is wrong. And seriously, I still have no idea what you're getting at quoting me. Let's recap:

• I say that I'm going to ban someone for a long time.
• You say it isn't respecting your opinion.
• I say you're right.
• You say that I'm banhappy.
• I define banhappy and show how it doesn't apply to me.
• You disagree, providing no evidence but rather your own opinion about my blocks, and accuse me of contradicting myself.
• I continually ask you what you're talking about.
• I do this list. Semicolon (talk) 21:15, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

As per the above comment, I did not call you banhappy. I quote: "I wasn't calling you banhappy." So I fail to see why you are still lingering under that notion. You then proceed to provide no evidence but rather your own opinion about my own opinions, and then ignore the numerous contradictory comments of yours that I've quoted. So where does that leave us? --Shadowcrest 21:30, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

(Reset indent) A possible solution to this ban length discussion? Here goes...an IP vandalizes. We ban then for a week. They come out of the block. They vandalize again. Banned for a month. They come out of the block. If we get more vandal action from that IP, they get the permabanhammer. As for vandal accounts, they can be permabanned. If they went to the trouble of making an account and THEN vandalizing, there probobly isn't any good faith to assume.L33t Silvie ^{I see wat u did thar...} 01:19, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

This has already been discussed, and I am still not pleased because the issue with permabanning IPs can't be resolved except by keeping the ban durations relatively short (as in, a year is still too much). I don't understand why you people are so dead set for permabans; what do we lose if the vandal returns when the ban is over? A couple reverts and maybe the 30s it takes to fill in Special:Block? Compared to the possibility of banning innocent users, I still fail to see where you all are coming from on this.

I already have no issue permabanning vandal accounts, because there's almost no way any innocent bystanders could be harmed in the process. --Shadowcrest 19:47, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

RE: NPA

Ok...I'll refrain in the future. But still, why is it that I get scolded for PA'ing a vandal IP, but some admins go untouched after insulting a non-vandal user here?L33t Silvie ^{I see wat u did thar...} 20:03, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Because I happened to be online when it happened, and there's a section in my last archive detailing something related. --Shadowcrest 20:05, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Oops

Thanks for fixing the YAV that I forgot to yesterday. :/ Miles (talk) 15:37, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

No worries :p --Shadowcrest 15:41, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Sorry

Truly, I am. If I do violate it again, don't hesitate to ban me.L33t Silvie ^{I see wat u did thar...} 18:49, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Idea

In order to possibly decrease the amount of non-notable Smasher pages being created, should there be a site notice saying something like "Please do not create non-notable Smasher pages"? I know we already have something about tagging non-notable Smasher pages, but this would be more direct, in my opinion.--Bek (talk) 15:01, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Most people wouldn't know it is there or would not even care to read it. Y462 (T • C • E ) 18:39, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Then maybe something with the MediaWiki that comes up in bold, capitalized letters whenever someone tries to create a new page on the Smasher namespace? Just throwing ideas out there, because I do see this as a big problem.--Bek (talk) 21:21, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

It is a problem, but people who make those smasher pages don't know what counts as notable and what doesn't. And even if we defined notable and non-notable, they'd probably still make the page. It's good that you're thinking about it because this is a problem. Cheezperson {talk}stuff 22:20, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Pikabro's personal attack

Does that seem kind of suspicious to you? As my activity at this place hinders more and more every day, I would like to know if I'm still accountable as an actual user of this wikia and not a vandal IP address, thanks. Blue Ninjakoopa 15:51, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

K...

Ok. Sorry, Shadowcrest. ~Teh Blue Blur~^{~You're too slow!~} 19:45, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

uh

I can't get on any chat room using my school's macs (right now, these are the only computers I'm able to use). My punishment will wear off soon so we can discuss this issue. Blue Ninjakoopa 15:58, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

IRC

I have two problems: one of which I would like to talk to you about on the SmashWiki IRC, the other being the SmashWiki IRC itself, because I've never actually used IRC before (I use MSN Messenger). If you could describe a sequence of events leading to me and you having a conversation on the IRC, and provide a suitable time and date for the start of this conversation, it would be much appreciated. PenguinofDeath 08:05, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Puzzle

Just a wild stab in the dark, but is it something to do with WikiPrincesses? Or is that too obvious? PenguinofDeath 10:04, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

It is, actually. Congrats- barnstar for you :] --Shadowcrest 14:29, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Zero Suit Samus (SSBB)

I seem to have gotten myself into a problem with another user... AGAIN!!! At first, I just explained why I changed the article in the edit summary. But then an IP user changed it back without saying anything in the edit summary. PoD tried explaining to the IP in one edit summary why the article was changed, but (s)he still just kept changing it back without an explanation. I then just fought fire with fire (kept changing the article back without another explanation) until I realized that this IP wasn't going to give up (which I admit I was wrong for doing). I then tried talking to the user, but (s)he still just changed the Zero Suit Samus (SSBB) article without saying a word. What should I do? Enigmatic Mr. L (talk) 16:24, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Gmail

I need to chat w/ you, and I don't have the IRC program. So, get on gmail.com, make an account, and invite t3h.l33t.n00bs@gmail.com to chat. Really, this is srs.L33t Silvie ^{I see wat u did thar...}

Question

Out of curiosity, why did you do this? --Posted by Pikamander2 (Talk) at 01:12, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

I'd prefer not to have my full real name displayed. I'd have used revisiondelete, but I don't have that tool, so I had to delete the revision so at least non-sysops can't see it. Shadowcrest 02:21, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

congrats and stuff

See, I knew that if I gave attention to it, you'd pass. So thank me! Oh, and congratulations! Cheezperson {talk}stuff 22:06, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Congratulatoritions!L33t Silvie ^{I see wat u did thar...}

Thanks. I didn't even realize it happened until you posted here >.> Shadowcrest 01:06, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Congratulations on your promotion, even though it is sort of pointless to do it here. Y462 (T • C • E ) 04:45, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Move

In case you don't want to continue this on Zeldapedia, I thought I'd bring it here. Also, as I'm out of date, and I could be wrong in asking you for this, but assuming you're still an admin, can you clear this up? Thanks. And, out of curiosity, what did you need the "external contact" for? -- Baltro (talk) 00:29, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

I didn't know you had it in you...

But I raise my glass to you nonetheless. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 02:15, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

I didn't either, but I guess I surprise myself sometimes :p Shadowcrest 02:21, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

13375poolR

He's back, and he doesn't appear to have learned his lesson.L33t Silvie ^{I see wat u did thar...}

I don't see the harm of perma-banning this user, since he continues to troll whomever he can. Paper Bowser (talk) 03:44, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

I seriously don't understand what everyone's problem with him is. He's not harming anybody. Yes, he's taking up space, and yes, it's generally nonsense, but it's funny, and we all could use a little more humor around here. I think everyone is taking him too seriously. If he was flaming people, then yes, I would ban him instantly, because what he does borders on jackassery, but some of the funniest people I know are jackasses, but he is doing no harm. I'd say let the guy be. I don't think he has many friends. Semicolon (talk) 15:10, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

PAs and trolling are funny? If that's the case, BNK is hilarious. Paper Bowser (talk) 16:47, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm surprised Semicolon thinks that humor is funny and that WE are taking things too seriously. Cheezperson {talk}stuff 17:15, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Humor is funny, that's the whole point, and yes, you are taking him too seriously. I know you are because he bothers you. BNK is way different, because BNK followed up, was caustic, personally attacked people, and fanned them flames whenever he stirred controversy. Point to where 13375poolR did those things. Semicolon (talk) 17:17, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Are you him?????????????????????????????????????????? And no offense, but you troll a lot too... Paper Bowser (talk) 17:28, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

This is a misconception that needs to stop. I used to troll a lot. I don't troll a lot much anymore. Please look through my edits, and you will see that what I say is the truth. Semicolon (talk) 17:34, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

But if you were him, you wouldn't need to troll on this account O.o... lol jk. I'm just surprised your taking this guy lightly but you won't let someone say that Roy is his main in brawl (which it is). Cheezperson {talk}stuff 01:00, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

As I explained on the Roy-in-Brawl talk page, I only disrespect people with ridiculous opinions who are serious about them, hence my reaction to the famous control-smash-with-your-mind thread and generally any thread started by TheLegendTamer, as well as to the idea that you can main Roy in Brawl. Yes, I understand 13375poolR is playing a fine line, and I won't hesitate to ban him when he clearly crosses a line. I just haven't seen him cross a line since his last ban, and since I find him funny, I'm not going to be the one to draw a line I know he'll cross. Other sysops may do that, and I won't take issue with that or their bans. I'm just saying I find him harmless. Semicolon (talk) 14:04, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

I did a quick analysis of 13375poolR's contributions and came up with the following:

• A decent amount (36%) of his edits are rants (not counting his newly-formed user page). Yes, they're funny to an extent (to some people), but they're disruptive, and there are better ways to be funny (such as using brevity and relevance).
• A quarter (25%) of his edits include what I would consider personal attacks (of any severity).
• Some (18%) of his edits have bad language.
• Some (14%) of his edits can be considered constructive.

In other words, almost two-thirds (61%) of 13375poolR's edits are unconstructive and can be considered trolling. While that may not be worthy of a block as of now, he's definately on thin ice, and he has been warned about his attitude before (although he was never actually blocked). Toomai Glittershine The Table Designer cntrbs 02:31, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

• I fail to see how his rants are disruptive. Practically everyone just ignores them, don't they? I don't see how that causes harm. He's not asking for people to pay attention to his rants, either, he just does his thing and goes away. He's sort of like a dog, really.
• I believe the personal attacks are what he was warned about/banned for before. If I see him do it, I'll ban him, no question.
• Most contributors and sysops on this wiki are prone to bad language, myself included, and there is no rule against it. Though some may find it distasteful, I think there's hardly anything 'tasteful' about 13375poolR, though nobody's expecting it from him and there's no rule against it.
• Really? I thought they were all rants.

I don't think that posting nonsensical rants in threads is trolling per se. I mean, sure it's nonsense but it's not hurting anybody. My logic is that trolling is not itself a bannable offense, in moderation, but a consistent history of trolling may be cause for a ban, and certainly anything that even resembles a step over the line for a user who is prone to trolling ought to result in a ban. Since I don't think that trolling in moderation is necessarily a bannable offense, and since I don't see posting nonsense as an issue as long as it doesn't hurt anybody, I don't see a reason to ban him. Doesn't mean I won't pull the trigger if, as I said, anything that even resembles a step over the line ought to result in a ban. But 13375poolR appears to be a one-trick pony. He does one thing, and he does it very well, and that's posting benign nonsense in the middle of hot discussions. Semicolon (talk) 14:04, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

"Quick"? :/

I may comment on this section when I have time (I'm gone until sunday), but just for the sake of correction he was blocked. Shadowcrest 07:30, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Hm, guess I wasn't using the AllLogs page correctly. Toomai Glittershine The Table Designer cntrbs 11:46, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

That was amazing what Toomai did. Obviously, this situation is troll-stick-up-for-troll. I think this pool's closed guy at least needs some warnings. Remember, BNK was kept alive by Shadowcrest, but look at him now (I learned this on AiB). He just seems to come back for, eh... "moar". Paper Bowser (talk) 01:02, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Firstly, branding another user a troll is a pretty strong allegation to make. As far as I know, Semicolon has never abused his powers as an administrator, and has never made a bad faith edit, though the tone of his comments occasionally borders on trollish. 13375poolR has already been given "some warnings" - he has in fact been blocked several times. This is because his comments, unlike Semicolon's, quite often overstep the mark. Blue Ninjakoopa wasn't the best example you could have picked as he only trolled occasionally, and frequently made good faith edits, but one time he overstepped the mark so far that it was decided that he should be banned permanently as the good faith edits didn't make up for the bad faith ones. 13375poolR, unlike either BNK or Semicolon, talks utter nonsense most of the time, and while his edits may be in good faith, only six of them have actually added anything of value to the page. 13375poolR's a trouble-maker, Semicolon just sometimes argues his point in an overly harsh way. Also, it seems like some people are trying slightly too hard to get 13375poolR banned, but without providing really solid reasons (preferably quoting policy and times when he's infringed it). O yeah, and he's called 13375poolR - where did the "pool's closed guy" comment come from? PenguinofDeath 09:15, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

lol, semicolon even admits he can be a troll at times. Like you said, he doesn't "cross the line" the way this pool's closed guy certainly has. I don't really believe in perma-banning (then again, I'm not a mod so it doesn't matter) unless a clear vandal is being dealt with. Perma-banning is a very powerful tool to use, and with great power comes... yadda-yadda, etc. Pool's closed guy has certainly earned himself all those shorter blocks he's gotten, but his actions don't warrant a permanent block. Just keep giving him longer and longer blocks (only if he continues to consistently troll) until he learns his lesson. He'll get bored and quit this place or become more good-faithed eventually. Either way, the wiki wins! Or i could just be rambling. Cheezperson {talk}stuff 16:19, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Hey, I have a solution. We could ban him from talk pages, but let him edit normal pages. 98.117.158.220 23:56, November 28, 2009 (UTC)

You know, you may want to check the date stamps at the end of each sig; this argument ended 5 months ago. RAN1 00:20, November 29, 2009 (UTC)

lol

How did you do that? Paper Bowser (talk) 02:44, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

How did I do what? :/ Shadowcrest 02:53, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Protection log

When you unprotected Semicolon's Treatise you said something along the lines of deal with vandalism when it comes up. Don't protect a page for an eternity. Just to let you know, Template:SSBTiers, Template:MeleeTiers, and Template:BrawlTiers are all protected due to being "likely target[s] of vandalism". Plus, their protection is almost 8 months old, and I personally don't find templates likely targets of vandalism. So, should they be unprotected? Enigmatic Mr. L 13:36, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Templates are likely targets of vandalism because if they're edited, it affects (effects?) all the pages that use them. That's why templates that are used in a lot of articles are protected. --Warwick 13:42, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Especially the Tier list templates, as I'm fairly certain that they would be subject to a lot of vandalism if unprotected due to people who either don't like tiers in general, or don't like these specific tiers. I think it would be best for the templates to stay protected as there's clearly a lot of antipathy towards some Brawl characters given all the vandalism of the character pages.

@Warwick: affect (verb) = cause something to happen to; effect (verb) = make something happen. "Affect" was correct. PenguinofDeath 14:03, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

o lol

i see wut u did there.Smoreking^(T) _(c) 18:55, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

You've been vandal caught

You may not discuss this catch with {{Vandal catcher}} or another {{administrator}}. Vandal catch ID #004Vandal catcher (talk) 19:03, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

=o

sorry i havent edited in smashwiki for like a year lol Prince Marth (talk) 02:20, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

ohai Shadowcrest! ^__^ ~Teh Blue Blur~^{~You're too slow!~} 11:13, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Hey :3 Shadowcrest 12:41, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

sorry

rubbish internet - I'm going to be inactive for a few weeks. Again, sorry. - PoD (I can't even sign my comments - there's no tilde key, and the signature button comes up as ----, but I haven't got time to sign in)

PS: the computer system sucks

We now have internet access in our flat, but I won't be anywhere near as active as I was before, nor will I be able to lurk on IRC all day... Anyways, o/ PenguinofDeath 17:00, September 17, 2009 (UTC)

Wha..Wha..What?

What is this nonsense? Y462 (T • C • E ) 01:49, September 21, 2009 (UTC)

It's my AiB?... Shadowcrest 21:02, September 21, 2009 (UTC)

Calcumis

Maybe this will help. It's one of the MIT series of videos and happens to be from a 2005 or 2006 lecture: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4sTKcvYMNxk#t=1320

In the event you're still not getting it, hit me up via special:emailuser. In the event you're in a problem set and you're almost getting it, hit up WolframAlpha.com and plug in "differentiate <example>" where <example< is something to the tune of "x^2" or somesuch. --Sky (t · c · w) 00:12, September 24, 2009 (UTC)

Here are a few of your least favorite words.

We need to talk. Semicolon (talk) 03:06, October 13, 2009 (UTC)

lol he rly madd

This is getting a little too out-of-hand. I don't go to the IRC channel to play 2nd-grade-bicker with PoD, I go there to talk to my friends. I don't hate PoD, no. He may hate me, but I don't have any reasons to hate him. If there is a way where as he and I can co-exist without fighting, please let me know. I've been dying to tell you an interesting story of mine. Paper Bowser (talk) 19:14, October 17, 2009 (UTC)

Favour

Hello Shadowcrest. I stopped by and noticed that my user page has been edited unnecessarily. Would you mind protecting it for me? I don't want it to be touched anymore. Thankyou. Toon Ganondorf (t c) 22:11, October 21, 2009 (UTC)

Sockpuppet Experiment

So, I (Semicolon) created this account to be a sock-puppet referencing a prior vandal who was recently asking to come back and I thought his name was funny so I used it here. I haven't actually caused any harm to the wiki nor is my intent to. However, let's say I (Semicolon) now make an RfB, and Common Welsh Dragenah supports it. Would that be abuse. Or say I just used this account to oppose Smoreking's nom without telling you? I'm just doing this to prove a point.

Btw, I intend to use this as a shoe puppet to test autoblocks and user-rights with. If you'd rather I didn't, that's fine and I'll be happy to block this account, knowing full well that I could unblock it whenever ;-). Have a nice day. Common Welsh Dragenah (talk)/Semicolon (talk) 04:42, October 31, 2009 (UTC)

1 Shadowcrest 18:37, October 31, 2009 (UTC)

Shadowcrest: How exactly did he (and I quote) "disrupt" SmashWiki by creating "a shoe puppet to test autoblocks and user-rights with"?

Semicolon: Your hypothetical situations involving you and Common Welsh Dragenah are entirely different from the current situation as Smoreking never used SZL for things like supporting his own RfA. Even if he did, as RfAs and such aren't done on a simple vote basis, and it's the actual content of each comment that matters, it shouldn't really be an issue - it might be bad form, but there isn't a policy against it. PenguinofDeath 20:08, October 31, 2009 (UTC)

Trolling, 'socking' (not really inherently disruptive in my book, only in his) Shadowcrest 03:49, November 1, 2009 (UTC)

Isn't Dragenah a famous vandal name that is a cross-wiki vandal that keeps coming back with a different variation of the name, like Willy on Wheels? (see this and this and this okay, that last one isn't a Drageneh per se, but the name is in the same vein.)--Bek (talk) 07:42, November 5, 2009 (UTC)

Yes, that was the point, I believe. OK, this wasn't really disruption per se, but it probably wasn't really smart either. How bout we all just accept what happened, move on, and no more socks? Sound good to everyone? Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 04:49, November 6, 2009 (UTC)

You're trying too hard.

http://super-smash-bros.wikia.com/wiki/User:Paper_Bowser

Paper Bowser (talk) 20:01, November 7, 2009 (UTC)

??? Shadowcrest 20:23, November 7, 2009 (UTC)

Ha! Ha! My blank user page represents the fact that I indeed have nothing to do! In regards to contributions towards the Wiki, do you have any suggestions? Paper Bowser (talk) 21:21, November 7, 2009 (UTC)

It's been a little over a month.

And I'm still banned from the IRC channel for SmashWiki. There's a saying: "A disabled police officer can not physically help out one in danger." I actually want to discuss topics there and contribute here too, but I can not do that with:

• You and PoD ignoring me (lol).
• Being blocked from IRC. I'm not banned here, but again, I would like to discuss things with you guys at the channel.

I'm having a hard time figuring out how PoD is in control over how the IRC channel works when you have more power. You both did agree on my block for a little while, but you sent me a personal message at AiB telling me that he is the one who decides. If I have to say it, I have learned my lesson. I don't know why I even bothered trolling (?) him in the first place. (Oh, and please respond to this message, too.) Thanks, Paper Bowser (talk) 18:08, November 23, 2009 (UTC)

You have an AiB account, you use IM, you're not banned on SmashWiki - there are plenty of ways for you to talk to people who use the IRC channel without actually using the channel yourself, so I don't see any desperate need to unban you, nor am I inclined to do so anyway given what you did to get yourself banned in the first place and the way you acted following that. Sorry, but unless you show me that you've really changed and won't just go back to your old behavior, I don't see a compelling reason to change the status quo. PenguinofDeath 20:42, November 23, 2009 (UTC)

I would argue that "status quo" is not being banned, unless the user has a long history of being banned and deserves it in many people's opinion. Also, I'm interested in knowing how someone can prove anything about their predicted future actions over the internet. (However, I am unaware of the circumstances of this incident, so I'm possibly/probably/certainly wrong.) Toomai Glittershine The Table Designer 22:19, November 23, 2009 (UTC)

I didn't think that "status quo" was the right phrase either, but that's what Shadowcrest said to say (he proofread my comment and made changes as he felt were appropriate). I think "the current situation" would have been better, but the meaning was clear enough. You can't "prove" anything about predicted future actions, but you can predict said actions with a reasonably high degree of accuracy, so it's not exactly unfair to make decisions based on those predictions. And yeah, there are very few people who know the full story. PenguinofDeath 10:28, November 24, 2009 (UTC)

Status quo = the way things currently are = he is currently banned, srs. Shadowcrest 20:00, November 24, 2009 (UTC)

I'd have a much easier time thinking that you have a reason to come back if you actually mentioned anything that you had to discuss. As it stands, all you have demonstrated is that you think the IRC is a place for you to be a douche to other people. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 23:13, November 24, 2009 (UTC)

@Clarinet Hawk - Shadowcrest isn't being a douche. As you can see, I'm trying to reason with him. And tbh I don't think PAing him is a good idea right now.

@Glittershine - Huh?

@Salad - Yeah, and I'm wondering if you can fix it. I can't really show a change in behavior on a channel... if I'm banned from the channel (lol).

Oh, and I don't use "IM". I don't even know what that is. Paper Bowser (talk) 23:56, November 24, 2009 (UTC)

Errr... CHawk was talking to you (Paper Bowser) not Shadowcrest. And that wasn't a PA anyway. Also, your behavior on the wiki is demonstrative of your behavior on IRC, so when you start being a productive and civilized SmashWiki user, you'll be unbanned on the IRC channel. Also, I actually have logs where you mention that you're talking to people on IM (Instant Messenger, in case you'd forgotten), and you even call it "IM"... PenguinofDeath 00:40, November 25, 2009 (UTC)

I'm trying to figure out when calling someone a douche isn't a PA (Personal Attack, in case you've forgotten). Perhaps Clarinet Hawk's comments towards myself and other users is why people rant about him elsewhere (I hope he doesn't care)? Nonetheless, he should refrain from calling me "names" and instead approach my comments like the college student that he claims to be. I think it's a bit more versatile that I can show my change in behavior there than here, but if we MUST split hairs, I can demonstrate good faith here too. You've just got to stop being so upset all the time, and I in turn won't snap back at you with smart remarks... or as you guys like to call it, "troll you". And because of the stupid life that I have outside of the internet, I'm not on as much. When I requested what should be done around here, I was actually asking for links to projects or some articles that are in need of clean-up. I can, however, just click the random article link and weed out tiny errors such as grammar mistakes and coding malfunctions. Sorry for the inconvenience, and I would like a response from one of you if not all. Thank you, Paper Bowser (talk) 01:56, November 25, 2009 (UTC)

What are they talking about? You just made a series of very constructive edits to the wiki. And to C-Hawk: that wasn't very nice. Paper bowser was being polite. Also, how can Paper Bowser show that he will improve his behavior if you guys block him? 98.117.158.220 05:06, November 25, 2009 (UTC)

IP: He can "show that he will improve his behavior" on SmashWiki because he's not blocked here, only on SmashWiki's IRC (which doesn't affect his ability to edit the wiki in the slightest).

Paper Bowser: We're not upset at the moment, whereas you're still being rude, and not "smart". I'm not very happy with the idea that you rant about fellow SmashWiki users on other websites, but there's nothing I can do to stop that - however, telling them on SmashWiki that you're ranting about them behind their back isn't sensible. What Clarinet Hawk said wasn't a PA. He effectively said that you have acted like a "douche" on IRC, which in no way means "you're a douche" - quite the opposite, in fact, as he's saying that such behavior is not typical of you. Don't say things like "claims to be" - he's a college student, fact. Casting doubts on obvious truths will encourage no one to take your side. Also, I never said that I'd never heard the term "PA" before, or didn't know what it meant, whereas I know that you use IM, and therefore know what "IM" means and what it is, so I really have no idea why you're claiming not to know about it. You say "I have learned my lesson", but I don't see any difference in your behavior at all. The content of your comments isn't exactly persuading me that you won't just go back to trolling people if we unban you. PenguinofDeath 10:15, November 25, 2009 (UTC)

I see you've once again, PenguinofDeath, selectively read my message. I never said that I "went to other websites to rant about you guys". That's very immature. All I said was that OTHER PEOPLE rant about you at other websites (seldom AiB). Honestly? Blasting PAs at someone who is nonexistent elsewhere? That's not very smart. Stop shoving words in my mouth. I still question your thesis on calling people names, however, and to be honest, it's just your way if slipping personal attacks past users. Wrong, again, for the third time. I do NOT use instant messenger. Maybe chat sites that other friends go to, but NOT "IM". I'll repeat: I do NOT use "IM" (I had to use upper-case words for emphasis, sorry). IIRC, I wasn't banned for "trolling". You got really angry with me for playing around (my bad) and blocked me from the channel. Now you're using trolling as my excuse. PenguinofDeath, as much as you would like me to disappear, I won't. I'm still going to contribute to SmashWiki (lol). Do you have solid proof that Clarinet Hawk is a college student? Then again, none of us on the internet have proof of anything without "pictures". I take CHawk's word that he goes to college, but I'm not fully sure. Even so, his behavior towards a certain group of people is very unreasonable (he no longer is a dick to those users, however). By the way, I hope that I'm not giving the impression that I hate or that I'm mad at any of you. Again, PenguinofDeath, please do not "be a douche" and state the obvious to me. If I knew any better, I'd say you're trying to troll me at the moment. A regular admin handles an argument with reason, and doesn't add gas to the fire. Your "smart" (yes, I called them "smart"), snappy, troll-esque responses to my posts only provoke more "rude" responses from myself. You should learn to control whatever negative feelings you have for me and not to dump them out here. Paper Bowser (talk) 18:58, November 25, 2009 (UTC)

Hey PoD, if that's the case, whats the use of the IRC in the first place? So that users can interact live. Since I'm a lowly IP, I can't use it but I understand that this isn't just an encyclopedia, it's a community of people who love smash. Smash lovers are few in number, so we have to interact somehow. Paper Bowser has proven himself worthy by now. There's no harm in giving him another chance. 98.117.158.220 00:01, November 29, 2009 (UTC)

The Administrators will decide when he "has proven himself worthy". And Smash lovers are in no way few in number - click here for proof. Read Clarinet Hawk's comment for my response to your first two sentences. PenguinofDeath 09:39, November 29, 2009 (UTC)

This is Shadowcrest's page. Let's hear his opinion. Also, I would like to say, it seems we're on the opposite sides of everything PoD. That is not the case. I actually admire the way you handle things responsibly and respectfully. You're a role model for many. Btw, the reason I said that is because whenever I talk about Smash at school I get made fun of. 98.117.158.220 02:57, November 30, 2009 (UTC)

(reset indent)

If Shadowcrest were to get involved it would just be as an arbitrator, as the real issue is between me and Paper Bowser. The discussion is only taking place on this page because Paper Bowser believes he has a better chance of getting Shadowcrest to unblock him than me.

Though I don't use AllisBrawl myself, from what I hear, it's perfect for smashers who don't have many people to play against locally, and no one there would make fun of you for talking about Smash. And about what you said about me being a role model: Thanks man, I appreciate it. PenguinofDeath 10:58, November 30, 2009 (UTC)

I, of course, would only believe such because Salad isn't really in full favor of my ban but knows that I deserve it for trolling you. He told me not to make him choose between you and I. It's like a mom/dad thing lol. Paper Bowser (talk) 03:34, December 2, 2009 (UTC)

BNK

In the Kirby wiki, Blue Ninjakoopa is an admin. Recently he asked me to tell you that he felt you were being unfair about his ban. I don't think he should be banned, he's not a vandal. I heard the reason was because he uploaded one of your pictures as an avatar. I don't know details, but that doesn't seem to be enough to ban him. Do you think you could consider unbanning him? 98.117.158.220 02:27, December 1, 2009 (UTC)

The incident you describe was not the reason for the banning - it was merely the tipping point of a long line of quibbles and other incidents, some of which merited (and earned) bans by themselves. BNK is no vandal - but I'm sure that few (if any) people here would like his attitude back. Toomai Glittershine eXemplary Logic 03:33, December 1, 2009 (UTC)

Frankly, the ban I placed was entirely fair. During the period before I blocked him, I was the only admin who didn't support a permaban, but for whatever reason people didn't argue it much with me so I didn't perma him. As Toomai said, that event was just what made me personally distrust him- I was just the one to block him because I knew everyone else already supported a perma and he'd already been blocked by 6 different admins.

And actually, Toomai, I'm not so sure- many of our users seem to be unable to separate personal feelings from what is best for the wiki. Shadowcrest 16:27, December 1, 2009 (UTC)

hey

u r t3h troll --Clarinet Hawk fan (talk) 23:01, December 3, 2009 (UTC)

As I said

Here I am, my dearest Salad.L33t Silvie ^{I see wat u did thar...}

Protection

Salad, I think you need to protect Sonic (SSBB) again. There's been some recent vandalism. 98.117.158.220 01:04, January 1, 2010 (UTC)

Instead of contacting Administrators directly, just post a message at the top of the Vandal Reports section on the Administrators' noticeboard. PenguinofDeath 12:45, January 1, 2010 (UTC)

Archive?

This talk page is at a massive 104 KB. Needless to say, it's way over the 30 KB limit for archiving; plus, it's flooded. RAN1 05:50, January 1, 2010 (UTC)

There's no set "limit", so he doesn't have to archive his page, tbh. Though it could probably do with it at some point soon, the page isn't used enough for it to be a very pressing concern. PenguinofDeath 12:45, January 1, 2010 (UTC)

The "some point soon" actually is in the past, PoD; this page was at 60 KB about half a year ago, and over 30 KB since last March. Also, by that last supposition you made, nobody on SmashWiki would have to archive, since user talk pages are rarely ever used. That defeats the purpose of archiving. So, :/. RAN1 16:59, January 1, 2010 (UTC)

This talk page has been around since March. As the start of a new year, it would be nice to "restart" your page :P. 98.117.158.220 18:25, January 1, 2010 (UTC)

Yes, RAN, that's exactly what I'm saying - in no way, shape or form is he, or anyone else, obliged to archive his talk page. PenguinofDeath 23:27, January 1, 2010 (UTC)

Look, we wern't forcing him. We were just telling shadowcrest that he should archive his talk page as it's quite long. 98.117.158.220 23:56, January 1, 2010 (UTC)

y0

Hey, I know we have bad history, etc. but you have to do something about Semicolon and Clarinet Hawk. People are leaving this place because they choose to bully people they place in their negative opinion, this leads to things like RAN and I leaving this place. We were good contributors, and I did deserve my block for socking/asshattery, but RAN was actually helping (as much as he and I do not along). Major contributors leaving will make a dent in the wiki's community and its activity. You, Smoreking, and Miles do your best to keep this place organized, official, and in shape, but it seems like the two stooges mess all of that up. If you want proof of their actions, just ask me. I can rally up some links for you. This is a serious matter. If these two don't stop, they'll have to BE stopped. I'm surprised no one is bothered with this. I thought I might need to pitch in (someone unlocked the IP). Cheez provided the link to the blog (that was recently deleted) and I took a peek, which was the first "peek" in a while. You've had arguments with him before; you know how he is. He's basically me with power, to be brutally frank. I know I'm not the only one who sees this. No user can exist peacefully as an editor if they're being constantly harassed by admins, in which they can do nothing in their defense. 67.10.177.73 02:55, February 4, 2010 (UTC)

Also, if you want something done about blog problems, contact Wikia's staff. 67.10.177.73 02:57, February 4, 2010 (UTC)

I need to go to sleep in like 3 minutes so I'll reply to your other post tomorrow or something but PoD contacted wikia this evening (afaik) so it should be resolved soon <3 Shadowcrest 02:58, February 4, 2010 (UTC)

We don't need to disable blogs; we need to disable internet drama. Miles (talk) 03:23, February 4, 2010 (UTC)

Miles: tbph, we need to disable blogs...

Shadowcrest: Yes, I contacted Wikia.

IP: I disagree - evidence would suggest that the slump that the wiki is in at the moment is not directly the fault of CHawk and/or Semi. Daily edit count has been coming down for quite a while now and there are fewer things to do round here so users leave as they feel they are no longer needed. How many users can you name who have been bullied off the wiki by CHawk and/or Semi? PenguinofDeath 14:02, February 4, 2010 (UTC)

IP, I'm presuming you are BNK. Here's a newsflash: if the wiki was actually important then users leaving would be a big deal. But it's not. It's a wiki. The content will remain preserved no matter what anybody does, and the content will remain if every user leaves. I'm not concerned about activity, because in truth, what else is there to do? And who really wants to spend hours of their life deleting or flagging crew/smasher pages? If that's your thing then go at it, but turns out that it's really dull and annoying and I don't blame anybody for not wanting to do it. I'm grateful when they do, but really, I don't give a damn about edits to character pages and trivia sections and trophies and what is more or less plaque on the actual pages people read. That's what RAN was doing in terms of "content" contributing, and when he wasn't editing talk pages pointlessly outside of that he was being a nuisance. Now, I think I know what this is really about, and it's not about the wiki. It's about you feeling spurned and angry at me/Chawk. Here's something you probably weren't expecting, but here it is: I'm sorry I was a douche to you. Half the time you didn't do anything to deserve the cruelty, but I was overly cruel on multiple occassions. I was still right most of the time I chastized you, but I didn't need to be so damn mean while making those points. But here's something else. If you feel spurned by this place then here's a life lesson: don't take it personally. It's the internet. Not real life. Real life matters, but only infrequently. The internet only matters if you make it matter. I don't bear any ill will to you, but the truth is you were a net-negative contributor. You added content, yes, but in general you caused a lot of wikidrama we didn't need. You made fusses about stuff that you should have let lie, and you acted personally affronted every time somebody said or did something nasty in your direction. I'm sorry you were emotionally injured by Smashwiki but it's time to move on. You can blame me for a decline in activity, but I'd like to see you prove it. I stopped coming here with any frequency last May. Back then the wiki was fine in terms of activity level. The truth is the activity level has gone down because there isn't anything else to write about. The game has been out for nearly 2 years and most of what can be written about it already has been. Is that so hard to believe? Semicolon (talk) 20:37, February 4, 2010 (UTC)

Wow, even I can respect the apology from Semicolon. Now that you mention it, there isn't much left to do on this wiki... Kperfekt ^{BURN!!! Revert That!} 21:26, February 4, 2010 (UTC)

Semicolon, I accept your apology. It's just sometimes you need to chill out when dealing with idiots. Wasn't it you who said that arguing with them only brings you down to their level? when an IP visits the wiki and makes blogs about fake glitches or vandalizes pages with "I like this character!", all you need to do is realize that that person IS an idiot and leave it at that. Block him for however long you feel necessary if he continues to be a vandal. I never knew RAN was a problem until now; usually SK or Cheezperson have positive feedback about him from IRC. Things have been written, but we can still re-word it better, too. I too am sorry for being an asshat.

Penguin, I didn't mean to sound as if I blamed Semicolon and Clarinet Hawk for the loss of users. In truth, people left due to the drama + nothing being able to be done (not a lot, at least). Clarinet Hawk and Semicolon's only problems were the way they handled users... OK, how they handled idiots. Most of that involved unnecessary flaming, etc., but hopefully from now on things will change. This place can be a network used by AiB's community; Miles has helped advertise it. Really, there wasn't much wrong with how you use your powers, it was how you talked to people. Like I said, let's hope for something more positive from here on out. :) And yes, I'm BNK. 67.10.177.73 23:19, February 4, 2010 (UTC)

I certainly have to chime in on this discussion. I understand and agree with everything this user has written, including his concession. I too, concede to my obvious shortcomings as a contributor. Lastly, I appreciate Semi's blanket apology. -But that's it.

The FACT is, These two mods rule this site with a douchebag fist. I've tried to come to terms with this, and I suppose I have, but the fact remains.

Semicolon, your apology is entirely neutralized by your established and direct mentality that "shit happens" and no one is to blame. In so much as you can tell others to get over it, they can also tell you off for it. The greater truth here is that: the internet, real life, and this website, ARE what PEOPLE MAKE THEM.

I know for a fact that people bitterly despise you two for your very poor manners. I can't speak for them, but I, for one, have most definitely decreased my activities on this site (which I still know has VERY much more potential) as a direct result of CHawk and Semicolon's relentless .... well, I can't even think of the word for their completely unneeded, unwanted, unappreciated, and down right unacceptable.... asshole-ness.

But I also know that what Shadowcrest has said is true: "Jerks will be jerks". These two are, through and through, jerks. -And they will never change. Therefor, it is entirely up to the rest of us to deal with them. Whether that means simply continued abuse, or justified reprimand; it's on us.

I do what I can for this site of the game I most love, which is ALL anyone can ask. Say what you will about me. I am NICE.

-Zixor (talk) 20:51, February 22, 2010 (UTC)

Well, I certainly have to chime in on this discussion. Zixor, let me give you some truth. Not every contributor contributes only valuable things, not every troll contributes only crap. A lot of the edits you made were disruptive or lacked a discernable point. I don't see decreased activity by people who made numerous edits of marginal value as a bad thing. If Platonism is real, then what I imagine in my head is the ideal, the true SmashWiki. Quoth the great philosopher Luke Skywalker 'If there's a bright center of the universe, you're on the planet that's farthest from'. Such is SmashWiki. You dig? Semicolon (talk) 23:42, February 22, 2010 (UTC)

"These two mods rule this site with a douchebag fist." Where have you been for the past six months? They hardly edit any more. The active Admins are now Shadowcrest, Smoreking, Miles and me, and we don't "rule this site with a douchebag fist". And cut out the PAs. This discussion was entirely civil, and even included two users who've been antagonizing each other for years apologize for their behavior, then you come along and start calling people jerks. I fail to see what made you think "I certainly have to chime in", and that your response was appropriate. PenguinofDeath 21:41, February 22, 2010 (UTC)

Well, I see that, as usual, my main points were disregarded. Semicolon, I do so love your "truths"; they are so educational. Especially the ones that are entirely obvious. As for my causing disruption or lacking points, I'd be quite pleased to go through each and every edit on a case by case basis, slowly trying to figure out how that could possibly be true. -Were my contributions what most would consider to be substantial? I greatly doubt it. -And if that was all that mattered in life (or, SW; as you seem to consider it a separate entity), the crap you dole out would be totally justified. I can of course assume that those people who made your standard of marginal edits were not also trolled to death by the likes of you, and so did continue to contribute. --I thought a mere one or two PA's of my own were entirely justified by your own, which still continue in a steady stream. Maybe I should try a different technique with such a ..."unique" foe.... : "I'm making fun of you. I'm right. You're a loser. That's the way it is. You're a loser." -Sound familiar?

-Penguin; I made it pretty clear where I haven't been recently, and why. (MAIN POINT). Though I have still monitored and made "various and marginal" edits, flying under the CH/SC radar (the ONLY two who have really ..."expressed" having a problem with me). If it's true that CHAWK AND SEMI have and will actually stop actively fucking with people (me), then I'll of course edit more. As for you not understanding the "chime", apology, resolve, or even point of my edit? -That really is your failing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zixor (talk • contribs) 19:49, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Zixor, here's an idea: if you really have so many problems with this site, stop coming to it. Seriously, since the day you made your account all I have seen out of you is bitching about how this site is run/maintained/has a face. If you really hate this site and the people on it, stop editing/coming. But that's not all I have to say. I'm really sick of your thought that we are going around bullying people. I can count one person that I may have somewhat bullied to get to leave the site, and I will still contend that that was for the best, even if it's something I do regret doing and don't plan to ever do again. Instead, your definition of bullying seems to include anyone who continuously argues their points that disagree with yours and uses actual rhetoric and logic is constructing their arguments. Also, your "marginal edits" were not trolled until you basically refused to accept that there is a professional scene for this game. Let me give you a little history lesson. SmashWiki was started in part by smashboards (and also in part by wikia) before the merge. In fact, it was intended to be an encyclopedia for Smash, including a large amount of information on the professional scene. I will also take this moment to point out that information as it pertains to the high-level play is much easier to verify than some random idea/thought/technique from the casual circles. So, yes, I do hold the professional scene in higher regard than the casual scene, even after only being a part of the latter for more than a year and only ever being tangentially associated with the professional scene. I have an obligation to what this site was (is) about, and a large part of that means keeping the information to the standards that would be accepted on SmashBoards. So when a user with two posts waltzes in and tells me that we should start talking about how things are "unfair" I really don't care. Then we enter into a discussion about why I (and the wiki) shouldn't care, you provide no evidence except to restate your points, tell me that my evidence isn't valid because I'm using it to support my argument (what else am I supposed to do with it?), and then say that I am bullying you because I am winning the argument. Yes, that pisses me off. If me arguing my points with you and you not being able to refute what I am saying is "bullying" in your mind, then yes I am bullying you. But that's not what bullying is. By your logic, Obama bullied McCain, Lincoln bullied Douglas, and Clarance Darrow bullied every attorney he ever faced. Oh, and when you say "I'd be quite pleased to go through each and every edit on a case by case basis" this is about the fifth time that I remember you saying something to the effect of "I could go through and provide examples and evidence, so you should accept my argument even though I'm not going to support it." That's a great way to argue. Good post. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 23:28, February 25, 2010 (UTC)

Don't mean to butt in here but I would also like you to note, Zixor, that there are currently no active bans out on any users who commonly edited. BNK used to be, but frankly, BNK was and is, pound for pound, a much better contributor than you ever were. All you did was add useless suggestions to talk pages and never really helped the wiki become more informative. BNK has made serious contentful contributions to this wiki. That's my point. Your suggestions were not accomplishing anything. You would say 'I would like to see audio profiles of all the characters'. That's great. Who will help me grind the wheat, or bake the bread? You just wanted to eat the bread. If you seriously had ever wanted to make this wiki a better place, you would have taken your suggestions and turned them into action and legitimiate contributions. Instead you said you would have liked to see it which didn't help anybody. That's why I always 'bullied' you by telling you I didn't care about your suggestions. Because you weren't helping anyone. What is there for me to care about, or say about things like that? Would you have liked me to congratulate you? If you would like me to do that for you in the future I will. Semicolon (talk) 01:36, February 26, 2010 (UTC)

The sentence "They hardly edit any more." countered every one of your points, because your comment was attempting to make out that their behavior is currently causing serious problems on the wiki, when in fact they haven't been around enough to cause such mischief. Activity on the wiki has been declining, but, at the same time, CHawk and Semi's activity has been declining. Quick warning in response to the general tone of your comment: if you keep talking to people like that, CHawk and Semi won't be the only ones expressing having a problem with you. If you have a problem with the Administrators, lobby for a removal of their powers. Otherwise, either stop talking about how you don't trust them and continue editing the wiki, or leave. Simple as that. PenguinofDeath 21:58, February 25, 2010 (UTC)

Wow, see what happens when huge projects come along? I vanish, and stuff like this happens. Anyway, Zixor, Penguin is right. Semi and CHawk have been declining in activity, and have been declining even more in their so-called "ruling with a douchebag fist" or however it was you said it. In hindsight, I can see how many people would have a problem with Semi and Clarinet. However, as you can see above, Semicolon has since improved in overall kindness. And to be honest, both are actually quite lenient. Have you seen how many users ignore UTPG? And how most don't even get a warning for it? I think that's pretty good. Now, by the looks of it, Clarinet Hawk and Semicolon don't really have a problem with you, they only will if you antagonize them.L33t Silvie ^{I see wat u did thar...}

*sigh* Fine, whatever. I sincerely apologize for all of my wrongdoings, useless suggestions and edits, and all other annoyances. From here on out: I will never comment on any talk page again. If you don't like my edit, undo it; I won't waste your time antagonizing with flawed logic. I will not defend. I will never take anything as a personal attack, nor make any. If there are any other problems, I will cease those as well. Zixor (talk) 15:04, February 26, 2010 (UTC)

It's finally getting to you, I see

The wiki is becoming self aware. Quickly, let's merge Spear Pillar with the main page or else stupidity will reign here forever lolololol Semicolon (talk) 07:08, February 15, 2010 (UTC)

tiers

You should add a disclaimer to all character's articles saying that things said in the article means nothing given the user's pure effectiveness with the character. It's in the wrong for someone who wants to learn about Ganondorf and finds nothing but complaints, then refuse to even touch him. It's also a disgrace to us Ganondorf fans. —Preceding unsigned comment added by SSBC (talk • contribs) 20:52, February 27, 2010

There aren't "nothing but complaints", there are truths as to why Ganon sucks. His jump is short, no matter how good you are, etc. Don't take it personally. I main Zelda. She's low tier too, and while I may somewhat disagree with her exact placement, I accept that she isn't the best character in the game and in a perfect skill balance, she loses to better characters. But I know that I still play my best with her, so I deal with it. You should learn to do the same with Ganon. Oh, and tiers aren't meaningless in the face of skill. Yes, skill can be more important, but you are a total idiot if you think that there is no way that the innate pros and cons of characters doesn't matter. Here's an example. My friend Shane is one hell of a hunter and a damn good shot. So let's say he and I go head to head and he has a bow and arrow (which he is very good with) and I have a M4 (which, while I can shoot, I don't know that much about). Even though the M4 is clearly better, my money is on Shane. But now say I've got the Farsight from PerfectDark. That thing is so much better (auto-aim, shoot through walls) that his skill don't mean crap. The first example is kinda like the Zelda v. Ganon match-up, the second is basically Ganon v. Meta Knight. Tiers exist whether you like them or not. And the next time you say something to the effect of "you can ban me for saying this..." I will take it as you requesting to be banned. If you think you are going to be banned for saying something, then you shouldn't be saying it. And if you don't think you're going to be banned for saying it, why are you prefacing it with such nonsense in the first place? Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 05:11, February 28, 2010 (UTC)

I propose that such a disclaimer would insinuate that the average user has no common sense. Toomai Glittershine The Stats Guy 21:06, February 27, 2010 (UTC)

This wiki is meant to present information, not make you feel good about a crap character. Also, Toomai.Smoreking^(T) _(c) 21:30, February 27, 2010 (UTC)

Aw, you three beat me to it. Miles (talk) 18:48, February 28, 2010 (UTC)

Is this a mockery? Taking only little snippets of what I said then having mod after mod accuse me of being completely in the wrong? I find this quite offensive, Clarinet. Also, I feel that this is quite useless, as I have already re-joined in a different username. I'm sorry, but I don't think that this should really even be here anymore. MAGMA (talk) 18:18, July 18, 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, but we keep all talk page content. DP99 (CTE) 18:41, July 18, 2010 (UTC)

My name isn't Clarinet and why are you posting in a section that is 4 months old? Shadowcrest 21:36, July 18, 2010 (UTC)

He's SSBC, and he's talking to CHawk. DP99 (CTE) 21:38, July 18, 2010 (UTC)

I didn't even post this here, I don't think. MAGMA (talk) 22:24, July 18, 2010 (UTC) --User was temp banned for this post

Even though it should be obvious, I'm going to chime in on why I gave a one day ban for this post. If you are not even sure that you are editing with your account, it means one of two things. Either your edits are even meaningful enough to you for you to remember typing multiple paragraphs of text on an admins page, or that someone has hacked your account and is using it maliciously. There are other things, but these are the two most probable. If it is the first, take the day off and make better edits tomorrow. If it is the second one, I will ban this account now so you can make a new one that only you have the password to. As it stands, using a sock to bump your own four month old resolved conversation and then claim that you don't think you posted the bump is more than deserving of a day off. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 23:11, July 18, 2010 (UTC)

Well, I guess I do see how this can bother you. I apologize and though I felt you may have misunderstood me a bit, I'll leave it alone. MAGMA (talk) 16:25, July 20, 2010 (UTC)

i'm in love with vanessa carlton

the topic headline has no relevance but I REMEMBER YOU I THINK and your fancy fonted name! help me :| HELP ME FIX MY BRAWL? i will do anything... Ike6481 (talk) 21:36, March 23, 2010 (UTC)

I honestly have no clue how to help you. My wii/game does the same thing; it reads everything but Brawl perfectly well, and it won't read Brawl unless I insert something else first/insert Brawl backwards first/etc. I believe Semicolon had the same problem but it magically resolved itself (?). If I hear anything more I'll let you know.

Also I would just like to note how odd it is that you remember me in particular. >_> Shadowcrest 20:28, March 24, 2010 (UTC)

hahahaa, it's a weird weird weird problem :')

and i dunno why i remember you, i reckon it's just the fancy signature Ike6481 (talk) 12:11, March 28, 2010 (UTC)

Re:why

Because I didnt know he actually got blocked. I thought that users who do vandalism recieved one or two warnings in their talk page before getting blocked. Since his talk page was empty, I though nobody blocked him yet. As I can see in his block log, we wont have any problem with him before at least 8 years.

--Mr Alex (T) 01:13, March 28, 2010 (UTC)

SalaComMander's signiture

← moved to User talk:SalaComMander

RE: hi

Thanks. {{SUBST:Nosubst|Signatures/Tienjt0}} 13:43, April 5, 2010 (UTC)

Woops, my signature seems messed up...

I think the code you want in preferences is {{subst:User:Tienjt0/Sig}}, and make sure you have the custom signature box enabled. Shadowcrest 13:48, April 5, 2010 (UTC)

The problem is that I edit another wiki (far more often than this one, unfortunately :p) that uses the template space for signatures... and it looks like our signatures apply across all wikis. {{User:Tienjt0/Sig}} 13:53, April 5, 2010 (UTC)

I know the feeling- I once edited GWiki a lot, and wikia really does make things a bitch... but it looks like you've got it all worked out :> Shadowcrest 13:55, April 5, 2010 (UTC)

Yep. >.< {{User:Tienjt0/Sig}} 13:57, April 5, 2010 (UTC)

You're right

I messed up a bit with all of this. I'll back off and do what I can to get semi to. Seriously, I have been blowing off steam about my thesis and didn't realize that this was getting taken the wrong way. Sorry if I offended you or anyone else on the wiki. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 03:41, April 6, 2010 (UTC)

Well, I've just spent nearly an hour furiously detailing on IRC exactly why I was so livid, and I think Semi bought into it (through frankly I'm never quite sure whether or not he really agrees with me or is feeding me a line of shit to make me shut up), so if he tells you anything that doesn't seem like me bitching up a storm it isn't true.

But really though, thanks. Shadowcrest 04:28, April 6, 2010 (UTC)

that policy proposal you linked to on your user page

can we do it? Semicolon (talk) 03:22, April 27, 2010 (UTC)

Most SmashWiki policies are based accurately on GW's rolf. BNK ^[E|T|C] 12:25, April 27, 2010 (UTC)

This is funny because the other day RAN was criticizing me for caring about editing the wiki too much. Shadowcrest 19:46, April 27, 2010 (UTC)

And today I'm criticizing you for caring about what RAN has to say. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 19:49, April 27, 2010 (UTC)

↑{sarcasm} Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 19:51, April 27, 2010 (UTC)

I'd have agreed with you so much more if you hadn't been sarcastic. Shadowcrest 21:03, April 27, 2010 (UTC)

Omega Tyrant

Thanks for taking care of that one. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 20:54, May 10, 2010 (UTC)

np...? Shadowcrest 21:44, May 10, 2010 (UTC)

I had meant to do it, but had to leave town so I couldn't get to it as soon as I wanted to. Oh, and before you get your pants twisted, this edit summary was a joke. K, thx, bye. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 01:38, May 11, 2010 (UTC)

I wouldn't have noticed until you pointed it out, but thanks for preempting my rage. Shadowcrest 20:53, May 11, 2010 (UTC)

hey man

I'd like to talk to you about something on the IRC channel. It isn't anything big, but I feel more comfortable discussing it there than here out in the open. You've been gone for a while, and I've seen you recently, but you aren't on the IRC channel much. Respond here when you're ready, I'll be here most of the day. BNK ^[E|T|C] 18:28, June 5, 2010 (UTC)

I'm on now if you want to get on. Shadowcrest 19:35, June 5, 2010 (UTC)

o/

I know, right? It's disturbing. And get on messenger sometime. I haven't heard from you in aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaages, dude. PenguinofDeath 09:21, June 29, 2010 (UTC)

Hey, I'm not the one who's never available... :p Shadowcrest 19:18, June 29, 2010 (UTC)

Also, I'm in Florida and my laptop is borked and I can't install MSN, and then I leave again for 10 days after I'm home for ~1 day during which I won't have a laptop. IRC plx? :p Shadowcrest 19:44, June 29, 2010 (UTC)

Made up Tier Lists Forums

Can I please have the stuff back that was in the section? I'll move it to my user page if you want! Doc King (talk) 16:28, July 20, 2010 (UTC)

All the stuff that was in that section was moved to other sections. Nothing was deleted other than the ability to classify forums as "made-up tier lists". Toomai Glittershine The Table Designer 16:40, July 20, 2010 (UTC)

IRC

Can you please unblock me from Irc, I'm sorry about what I said. Doc King (talk) 01:35, July 23, 2010 (UTC)

I doubt that. Unless you decided not to be homophobic within the past 5 or so minutes, nothing has changed. I might unban you eventually. Shadowcrest 01:38, July 23, 2010 (UTC)

I'm sorry of what I've said Salad, I promise I won't do that again, I was joking with you! Doc King (talk) 12:14, July 23, 2010 (UTC)

Its not my job to make any decisions, but I think what you did was very wrong, and you deserve this punishment. Doctor Pain 99 (CTE) 15:14, July 23, 2010 (UTC)

It doesn't matter if it's a joke. That's like excusing racist remarks as "jokes". Sir Anon the great 17:22, July 23, 2010 (UTC)

Well when is the punishment over? Doc King (talk) 17:33, July 23, 2010 (UTC)

"I might unban you eventually.", said Shadowcrest. BNK ^[E|T|C] 19:20, July 23, 2010 (UTC)

Hey salad, can u please unbanned me from irc cause I miss the ppl there and I really didn't mean to hurt your feelings (if they were hurt). I'm sorry man, if you took it too seriously, I'll stop making fun of it. Please give me a second chance! Doc King (talk) 21:35, July 25, 2010 (UTC)

I wasn't offended, I actually found it funny. Friends of mine are actually more appalled than I am. Furthermore, I am not looking for an apology, I am looking for an end to your intolerant attitude. Which I doubt will occur.

Tell you what: if you can write me a legit paragraph detailing why exactly you reacted the way you did, I'll consider unbanning you. Ok? Shadowcrest 21:42, July 25, 2010 (UTC)

Ok, it's a deal Salad!

So I reacted the way I did because I thought I was being funny. I was joking around with you and just saying stuff without thinking twice about it. Now I've seen other people do stuff like this and I thought I could do the same. I was basically acting like a jerk in front of you and the other people on irc.

So I promise not to do this again and I won't make fun of you if you don't want me to! Doc King (talk) 21:55, July 25, 2010 (UTC)

Well, aren't you gonna respond? Doc King (talk) 22:21, July 25, 2010 (UTC)

Dude, it hasn't even been half an hour since you posted... How to not get unbanned: nag the admin in question. Cool your jets, and wait for him to respond. PenguinofDeath 22:24, July 25, 2010 (UTC)

Ok, got it penquin! I'll be patient! Doc King (talk) 22:26, July 25, 2010 (UTC)

Whatever. Shadowcrest 23:15, July 25, 2010 (UTC)

my vote

hi salad

I voted 'absolutely' on the poll on your user page. In case you're curious, the irony tasted like tilapia with a sour lemon sauce and a hint of ginger. Also, I saw your 'qualifications' page. It made me giggle.

That is all. Semicolon (talk) 01:56, July 26, 2010 (UTC)

Welcome back & cool post bro (h) BNK ^[E|T|C] 02:54, July 26, 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the constructive criticism! I certainly hope you continue leaving such informative messages on my talk page in the future! Shadowcrest 22:06, July 26, 2010 (UTC)

My Made up Tier Lists

Hey Salad, can I make the made up tier list section again or do I have to put them on my user page? Doc King (talk) 21:57, July 27, 2010 (UTC)

If you mean can you recreate a sub-section of the forums for made up tier lists, no, you may not. Either put them in an existing category or in your userspace, or better yet, don't make them at all. Shadowcrest 22:02, July 27, 2010 (UTC)

Userpages

To be sure, when an user is permabanned, that is not a proper precedent for deleting their userpage? Omega Tyrant 08:58, July 30, 2010 (UTC)

It hasn't been done before (except for once which I missed and would have reverted had I seen), and furthermore I see no reason to do it in the first place. What do we gain from deleting the page of a perma'd user, exactly? Nothing. So at best we lose nothing, but in cases like Zeldasmash where he spends 90% of his day editing his userspace, all the evidence for the block becomes immediately unavailable to all non-admins. If you have a reason to delete their userpages that I am magically failing to see, do share. Shadowcrest 12:52, July 30, 2010 (UTC)

I agree with you, I was just making sure that an user being permabanned is not a proper reason to delete their userpage for future reference. Before I deleted 13375poolR's userpage, I noticed that other users who were permabanned had their userpages deleted, such as SSBC. So when I saw the delete tag on 13775poolR's userpage, I though that it was proper procedure to delete the userpages of permabanned users. Omega Tyrant 13:05, July 30, 2010 (UTC)

SSBC was the one example I was talking about that I missed :P. Every other perma'd user (not including throwaway accounts) had their userpage kept, though.

I don't fault you for deleting it; it might even be standard practice elsewhere. I just find it detrimental to do, so I reverted. (I also reverted Toomai when he did it a couple days ago.) Shadowcrest 15:25, July 30, 2010 (UTC)

Internet Relay Chat

I need to speak with you there. The topic is of great importance. Since ping isn't working, could you leave a message on your talk page to let me know you're there, since I'll likely be checking the recent changes more than the chatroom itself? Thank you. BNK ^[E|T|C] 21:07, August 12, 2010 (UTC)

I'm now idling in the channel. If you don't need to conversation to be in real-time, you can go ahead and pm me if you want. Shadowcrest 00:17, August 13, 2010 (UTC)

User_talk:Alexander_Acre

Why did you delete it, if you're not supposed to remove comments? Mr. Anon teh awsome 00:08, August 15, 2010 (UTC)

Mr. Anon is right. The proper thing to do would be protection, not deletion. Doctor Pain 99 (CTE) 01:09, August 15, 2010 (UTC)

No, in this case it was a vandal account, so we delete the talk page. There was nothing to be gained from leaving the talk page up, as it did nothing to document why the user was banned. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 01:18, August 15, 2010 (UTC)

I thought the rule here was "don't remove talk page content," not "don't remove content unless blah blah blah." There wasn't a reason that warranted deletion, and by your logic, every single talk page of a banned user needs to be deleted, which is bull. That page should be kept for refrence. Doctor Pain 99 (CTE) 01:39, August 15, 2010 (UTC)

The guy was banned on the first day because of being stubborn. Pure vandal account. We have no need for it. And Salad has revived deleted talk pages.--MegaTron1XD 01:41, August 15, 2010 (UTC)

Then what the heck is the rule on here? Don't remove talk page content unless your an admin who is deleting a page? I'm confused. Doctor Pain 99 (CTE) 01:44, August 15, 2010 (UTC)

The intention of the "don't remove comments" rule is so people don't have to wade through revisions to see what-all people have said. Deleting a page keeps the comments intact, but only admins can see it, and in the case of vandal accounts it can be better to hide the comments from the general public. Toomai Glittershine 02:29, August 15, 2010 (UTC)

I honestly didn't use any standards of keeping/deleting vandal talk pages or whatever for this case. Normally I'd oppose deleting talk pages. However, in this case, some certain editors (don't recall who) would simply not shut the fuck up on the talk page. I had a problem with this because 1) it's in the wrong place, and since I'm not even sure he was a vandal that's just ... and 2) the discussion was retarded anyway. The rule for 99% of cases is going to be don't remove content. Shadowcrest 05:20, August 15, 2010 (UTC)

Let's end this once and for all

So, I see you've blocked Zeldasmash and Doc King. Honestly, I can't disagree with the reason, but since their last blocks I do think they have been trying to edit better. How about I let them edit their talk pages for the next month, and if they can write a compelling 500+ word reason as to why they are valuable to the community, they get to come back. If they whine for "teh unbanz" they get perma-baned. If the response sucks, they get the month without the talk page. Sound good? It should be amusing if nothing else. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 15:56, August 17, 2010 (UTC)

When over 80% of their past 100 contributions have been in their userspaces, I'm inclined to disagree with them "trying to improve". They still constantly talk about their own made-up useless tier lists on IRC (and wiki), and even when they do edit the mainspace it's generally a sub-par contribution. To me your proposal seems like "playing with your food"-- I don't believe you think they have a chance to "succeed" at writing, and you mostly just want to see it because you'll think it's funny. I typically don't block people just to unblock them a day later-- if the block was warranted in the first place, I see no reason for it to be overturned, regardless of what they may think about it. They have repeatedly failed to be a useful contributor, and an essay about why they have been (which is bound to be false) doesn't change that. They can try again in a month, if they truly believe they're valuable to the wiki. Shadowcrest 22:11, August 17, 2010 (UTC)

What Shadowcrest said, tbh. That would be ultimately pointless. However, if your aim was for them to see your above comment and be so pissed off that they'll be tempted to not return after their blocks are up because they no longer trust the admins, job done. PenguinofDeath 19:55, August 20, 2010 (UTC)

Two Things

[3]: Yes; only a cad would do such a thing.

[4] + [5] = permaban, surely?

PenguinofDeath 19:55, August 20, 2010 (UTC)

I no longer think that message is relevant, since BNK isn't really a douche-troll anymore. I guess if others think it still applies they can follow through. Shadowcrest 20:48, August 20, 2010 (UTC)

1) It's only OK if there are hot flight attendants and you get to bang them in the bathroom.

2)I'm kinda torn on this one. On the one hand, I did tell him I would do this, but part of me wants to give him this one. I gave him a chance before and it paid off, so I think I'll let this slide for now... Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 03:56, August 21, 2010 (UTC)

Why did you delete my page?

Why did you delete my page Steel Type Pokemon? It is perfectly fine!Mesuxelf (talk) 22:41, September 21, 2010 (UTC)

Because this isn't PokémonWiki. Yes, it's great that Lucario and Steelix are steel type pokemon and they're in Smash, but there is no reason for a page devoted to that information to exist on SmashWiki. Shadowcrest 22:44, September 21, 2010 (UTC)

Steelix is in smash? and Lucario, Metagross, Jirachi, and Scizor are steel types. Mesuxelf (talk) 20:29, September 22, 2010 (UTC)

The point still stands. The information the page would contain doesn't warrant a page all to itself. Shadowcrest 23:35, September 22, 2010 (UTC)

deh new poll

Is there an event in particular that spurred the new poll on your userpage, or was it just a "whatever let's do this"? Toomai Glittershine 03:01, September 24, 2010 (UTC)

Never mind, I found it. Toomai Glittershine 13:58, September 24, 2010 (UTC)

Actually I was emailed by someone from NIWA asking if I was interested and if the community was interested. Though ofc wikia being a piece of shit never hurts. Shadowcrest 18:39, September 24, 2010 (UTC)

Hi, I sent said email since NIWA is currently taking steps to set up a Super Smash Bros. wiki. We like SmashWiki and have talked to Shadowcrest in the past, so instead of creating a competing wiki right off the bat, I'm offering to host SmashWiki on an independent domain (currently ssbwiki.com). So if there's any interest in leaving Wikia, let's continue to discuss this. --Porplemontage (talk) 20:21, September 24, 2010 (UTC)

We should probably discuss this in the place we've already set up to do such. Shadowcrest should be able to e-mail you where it is. Toomai Glittershine 21:45, September 24, 2010 (UTC)

That sounds good, but I still don't know where this place is. --Porplemontage (talk) 04:09, September 26, 2010 (UTC)

I don't either tbh, Toomai said it was a forum but I can't find it. :P Shadowcrest 04:39, September 26, 2010 (UTC)

http://sysoplounge.proboards.com/ I think an admin has to validate new accounts. Toomai Glittershine 12:55, September 26, 2010 (UTC)

Is this move to NIWA official? Should everyone start packing and moving out? Shark (talk) 19:10, September 29, 2010 (UTC)

In my opinion, anyone who wants to contribute to the new wiki can, and if you're not interested you can continue to contribute to SmashWikia. I will eventually leave SmashWikia for SmashWiki, but nobody is being forced to come with me. Shadowcrest 20:30, September 29, 2010 (UTC)

New logo

Hi, just letting you know (or reminding you) that Toomai and I have proposed some new logo designs for the new Wiki. You can check mine out here and Toomai's here. It would be great if you could let us know what you think. Shark (talk) 20:46, September 30, 2010 (UTC)