Talk:Alph

Is Alph a character?

1.Read the article, 2.sign your talk page posts with four tildes (~), 3.He's a color change of Olimars. Laikue (talk|contribs) 06:28, 11 September 2014 (EDT)

Re: Source Gaming

The site in general provides useful translations. However, with other translations of Japanese articles and such they generally provide a specific source from them, e.g. such-and-such Famitsu article. This is questionably open-ended and I'm not exactly inclined to trust it without a more reliable source being given. Miles (talk) 16:33, 26 August 2015 (EDT)

[1]

[2]

[3]

The design documents aren't "mysterious", they're from Sakurai's own books he recently released. Additionally, if you have any more questions about it, PushDustin has a user account here to ask him directly, and he can be easily contacted on Smashboards if he doesn't check here. Omega Tyrant 16:48, 26 August 2015 (EDT)

I don't believe PushDustIn or his team has specified anywhere that this claim about Alph comes from those books specifically, in contrast with the posts you linked. Miles (talk) 17:03, 26 August 2015 (EDT)

Some basic reading comprehension makes that clear, that is where they got the Smash 4 project plan from (aka "design documents"), and they clarify in the beginning of the Alph article that they didn't cover it before because they just realised then how Sakurai refers to clones. Additionally, the Rock Pikmin point from the Alph article was explicitly covered here, which is about the information from Sakurai's anthologies.

Factor that all in with Source Gaming's credibility, and it is just silly to think they pulled the Alph information out of their ass, just because they said "design documents" instead of "Smash 4 project plan from Sakurai's anthologies", when anyone following them knows what "design documents" refers to. Omega Tyrant 09:49, 27 August 2015 (EDT)

I'm just a little hesitant to let it in on their reputation alone, since I'm worried about it setting a precedent of anything SG posts being included blindly. As I previously discussed with PushDustIn, sometimes they stretch beyond what their sources actually say in ways that I find dubious at best. Miles (talk) 12:44, 27 August 2015 (EDT)

Yeah don't be spouting the slippery slope fallacy here, this information isn't being included "blindly". Omega Tyrant 00:52, 9 September 2015 (EDT)

I'm not saying slippery slope. I'm saying reputation is not sufficient basis. And yes, we are having to take out things from people blindly parroting SG's posts. Miles (talk) 01:11, 9 September 2015 (EDT)

Yes that was a slippery slope argument. "If we allow this, then this bad thing will end up following", e.g. slippery slope. And that link is not someone "blindly parroting incorrect information from SG", it's from someone misinterpreting the information themselves and not something SG stated. If we're going to start excluding valid information because some random editor might misinterpret something and put in misleading/incorrect information that we can easily fix/remove, then we might as well as not bother with the wiki to begin with, as information gets misinterpreted all the damn time; just look at how many people misinterpret Sakurai himself and claims he said ridiculous things like "Smash 4 is going to have less characters than Brawl".

Reputation itself is a factor, not all sources are equal; there's a difference between if that Alph post was made by some random person on the internet out of nowhere, and being made by SG. Just like there was a difference between when some anon on 4chan claimed they datamined unused data of a bunch of characters, and The Cutting Room Floor verifying Ryu's and Roy's data on the 1.0.6 version. And again, SG sourced the information themselves, the "design documents" are obviously referring to the revealed project proposal in Sakurai's books that they covered in previous articles they done immediately before the Alph post, this isn't something "based on reputation" alone. Omega Tyrant 04:12, 9 September 2015 (EDT)

If that's "obviously" what they meant, they should just outright say so. Trusting on reputation has had less-than-stellar results before. Miles (talk) 11:59, 9 September 2015 (EDT)

Do you really not understand what "design documents" mean, especially when the site just covered the project proposal from Sakurai's books, and when the Rock Pikmin information from the Alph article was already covered in those previous articles? And calling the Gematsu leak "less-than-stellar" is a joke, when all its information but two characters ended up true in the final game, and of those two characters, one had a reference to a series icon datamined that strongly implies they were indeed in development at some point, while the other has information from Sakurai that implies he was more than just "considered". Being a Gematsu denier is pure delusion.

But regardless, Gematsu is irrelevant here; this isn't a "just take our word for it" situation from a single person about something that may happen in the future that they heard from an undisclosed source (like the current ongoing Shovel Knight rumor), it's information directly sourced from Sakurai about the game's development. Omega Tyrant 00:42, 10 September 2015 (EDT)

We should be able to link to a secondary source for the "design documents" that at least confirms the existence of the translation's source. Toomai Glittershine The Pan-Galactic 10:15, 10 September 2015 (EDT)

The original source of the Alph translation is Sakurai's book. Here's a Tweet from Sakurai promoting the book. The Tweet shows images that we have translated into English. If you would like a scan of the book, please PM me on SmashBoards, and I'll be happy to provide you with the original Japanese pages. I don't post them publicly because they are copyrighted, and out of respect for Sakurai's work.

Please contact me on Twitter or SmashBoards if you have any additional questions about our sources in the future. I almost didn't see this page. --PushDustIn (talk) 23:29, 10 September 2015 (EDT)