User talk:SenorMexicano

Hi there!

Welcome!

Welcome to our wiki, and thank you for your contributions! There's a lot to do around here, so I hope you'll stay with us and make many more improvements.

Read this first as it provides many great resources designed to help users get oriented with the wiki and become part of the community.

Visit the recent changes to see what other people are editing right this minute, and where you can help.

Questions? You can ask at the help desk or on the "discussion" page associated with each article, or post a message on my talk page!

Need help? The community portal has an outline of the site, and pages to help you learn how to edit.

I'm really happy to have you here, and look forward to working with you!

Disaster Flare (talk) 21:47, 9 April 2016 (EDT)

Just wondering

But why'd you mark your recent userspace edit as minor even though you added over 800 bytes to the page? Iron Reggie, the Fearsome Warrior 03:55, 15 April 2018 (EDT)

Although it may have been 800+ bytes, the edit itself was actually pretty minor. Pokebub (talk) 04:01, 15 April 2018 (EDT)

Oh, ok. Hi, btw. Iron Reggie, the Fearsome Warrior 04:01, 15 April 2018 (EDT)

CEO

Side event winners should not be included in the template. This is also the reason why M2K isn't listed as an EVO winner for Brawl. PokemonMasterJamal3 (talk) 19:31, 4 July 2018 (EDT)

Got it. Wasn't too sure about it, but thanks for the clarification. I'll keep that in mind when editing future tournament pages. Also, was removing PM from the CEO 2015 section intentional? I understand it was a side-event, but it seems kind of strange to remove it anyways. Pokebub (talk) 01:32, 5 July 2018 (EDT)

I guess I can re-add it while noting that it's a side event. PokemonMasterJamal3 (talk) 07:37, 26 July 2018 (EDT)

DISPLAYTITLE

In Smasher:Rickles page, there is somebody deleting the DISPLAYTITLE code, and his reason is Smasher pages don't get the displaytitle treatment. So I wonder are DISPLAYTITLE suitable for smasher articles? GRAND DAD Fleenstones!? 06:42, 15 July 2018 (EDT)

Yes, DISPLAYTITLE is indeed suitable for smasher articles. I'm not really sure why Aidan thinks the opposite, but he was right in reverting your edit. Smasher page titles should stay in the same consistent format of "Smasher:<insert smasher name here>". The only times DISPLAYTITLE is used on Smasher articles is when players have either a lowercase letter at the beginning of their name or certain punctuation marks in their name. Pokebub (talk) 07:10, 15 July 2018 (EDT)

Aidan reverted my edit? I am not the one who added DISPLAYTITLE on Rickles' page. But anyway, I think I get it now. GRAND DAD Fleenstones!? 07:15, 15 July 2018 (EDT)

Ah, I thought you were the one who tried putting DISPLAYTITLE on Rickles' page. My bad. Pokebub (talk) 07:17, 15 July 2018 (EDT)

Cloudhead Live

The reason you weren't able to find anything about CLR is because it goes by several names (like Cloudhead Live Rankings, Cloudhead Rankings, Cloudhead Live, CLR, or simply Cloudhead). Off the top of my head, plenty of relevant players like Ally, Anti, MVD, and Fatality have talked about it. In addition, there was a time period that CLR was mistaken for being an exact prediction of the PGR, forcing both suar and the creator of the CLR itself to clarify otherwise. PokemonMasterJamal3 (talk) 07:23, 26 July 2018 (EDT)

I see, thanks for the heads up. I'm seeing a lot more tweets from top players now. Also, could you answer my question up in CEO section of this talk page? I think you might've missed it. Pokebub (talk) 07:32, 26 July 2018 (EDT)

Smash 4 Saga

Is it real? because if it is, then that's a Smash 4 major (I saw you entered into it so that's why I'm asking). SugarCookie 420 22:04, April 1, 2019 (EDT)

I don't think so. I'm pretty sure it was just 2GG's April Fools joke, but then again they might actually do it. I guess we'll just have to wait and see. Pokebub (talk) 19:22, April 3, 2019 (EDT)

Nimbus series Draft

Just wanted to let you know I finished updating the draft you made for the Nimbus tournament series. I think it's pretty much ready for the main space now. Jaydyndm (talk) 10:59, May 23, 2019 (EDT)

re: css

ok, i'm done editing it. thank you for letting me know. Conker the Squirrel (talk) 01:33, July 7, 2020 (EDT)

Presenting evidence

Hey there, regarding the revisions of https://www.ssbwiki.com/Smasher:EmmiZhang?action=history, I have spoken directly with Emmi herself: https://imgur.com/a/xisSgwW. If such information is not enough, you can confirm with her yourself: https://www.facebook.com/emmi.zhang/. When you say "Information isn't true." can you provide your side of the evidence? Have you actually spoken with Emmi herself? Or are such information based on conversations with others? Given that there are inconsistencies on the actual identity, the page should be removed as no information can be verified.

73.70.82.215 23:03, May 11, 2021 (EDT)

The thing is, we aren't denying EmmiZhang doesn't exist; there used to be an image of her on the wiki. What we are saying is that the EmmiZhang being represented on the wiki is not her, but Simon Xu. You can go to the Australian Smash 64 Discord and there's a lot of discussion on how Simon Xu posed as EmmiZhang and used TAS for the combo videos. CookiesCreme 23:09, May 11, 2021 (EDT)

I am in the discord, however the thing is, none of it is verifiable evidence but all "speculations". Not a single shred of evidence can be shown to be objectively true. Do discussions/speculative conversations constitute as actual reality? The person exists and can be contacted on facebook. If that is the case, the wiki page should be changed to speculative language, i.e., "there is debate on the actual identity of Emmi Zhang, some have argued it is Rom, while others have argued it is truetears. However, it is unclear who the actual identity of Emmi is.", rather than objectively true statements such as "Emmi Zhang is ..." 73.70.82.215 23:15, May 11, 2021 (EDT)

So, according to the Discord, the Facebook account you talked to is a fake. The information we had on her page can also be confirmed by users who claimed to have witnessed it. Since we also have a lot of other evidence that this scenario is true, I believe that what we have on this wiki is accurate. We could go with "Emmi's real identity is allegedly..." as a neutral ground, but as for reverting all of what we have on there, that's a no-go. CookiesCreme 23:20, May 11, 2021 (EDT)

Thanks. I see, so again no evidence has been presented, but rather "claims by people who have witnessed it". No evidence either has been presented that such Facebook account is a "fake" besides speculative discussions and conversations. I agree with you that such information should not be deleted and apologies for my edit since I do not use wiki much. However, given that all "evidence" is based on discussions/claims/speculations, the language should not be presented in such a way as truth, e.g. "Emmi Zhang is X", unless hard evidence can be used to substantiate it. Rather, speculative language should be used, such as "There is debate on the actual identity of Emmi Zhang, with some people stating that it is Rom, while others saying it is truetears." Other information such as the name, Simon Xu, should be also verified with actual evidence. If there exist only claims and speculative discussion, then such name (or other identifying information) should be redacted until hard evidence can be presented. For instance, I have claims that truetears is Jacob (from talking to the facebook account). Again this is only speculative and such information should not be presented as factual truth on the wiki page, especially for verifiable information such as name/location/age etc. I believe this is the logical thing to do in light of any hard evidence. 73.70.82.215 23:33, May 11, 2021 (EDT)

In a discussion where two sides are presenting evidence, and one side has more evidence to back up their case, one would logically be more inclined to side with more evidence. Aidan, the Rurouni 00:57, May 12, 2021 (EDT)

I agree with you, however, when neither side can present objectively true evidence, and both sides are just speculative discussions, then the language used shouldn't be presented as if it is factual statements. For instance, words such as "allegedly, supposedly" should be used rather than "is, has" etc 73.70.82.215 01:53, May 12, 2021 (EDT).