User talk:Cookies and Creme

NOTE: Put all new talk page posts on the bottom of the page. Thank you :)

The Archives
Archive 1	Archive 2
Archive 3	Archive 4

Bocchi

Do you think you could help me with the Bocchi article? the links in the controversy section broke for some reason.ClemSSB (talk) 06:08, March 2, 2022 (EST)

Arguments in templates are case-sensitive. --CanvasK (talk) 06:23, March 2, 2022 (EST)

@ClemSSB, Cookies formerly had a Bocchi draft but since the smasher doesn't want her page to be created the draft got deleted. NPM Morr!? 06:40, March 2, 2022 (EST)

Oh. I wouldn’t have made another one if I realised she didn’t want one. I was wondering why she didn’t have one already lolClemSSB (talk) 06:53, March 2, 2022 (EST)

Browi

Hi I'm really new to this. I emailed you through the "email this user" option. Please take a look. Thank you! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Browi (talk • contribs) 23:24, May 10, 2022

In the future, you can contact me right here on my talk page. It's much more faster than the "email this user" option.

Regards to your first question, if an edit conflict takes place, you can scroll all the way down and see the edits that you were going to make. All you need to do is copy and paste the changes you want to make back into the main article. If you got any other questions, you can just let me know. CookiesCreme 23:27, May 10, 2022 (EDT)

Thank you. Do you have any information on how to make pages? I'd like to create some pages for the smashers in my scene. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Browi (talk • contribs) 23:39, May 10, 2022 (EDT)

In order to have access to page creation, you need to be autoconfirmed (7 days after your first edit, 10 edits). Before making a Smasher page, I recommend taking a look at SW:SMASHER and SW:NOTABLE for guidelines on who can get a page, as well as how to create a page. It's also helpful to copy what an existing Smasher page already has. CookiesCreme 23:41, May 10, 2022 (EDT)

Apology

I’m sorry for spam-like edits I made on SmashWiki. I promise you that I’m not a vandal. 174.55.24.64 16:54, June 6, 2022 (EDT)

You're missing the point. It's not about whether you're spamming or a vandal. The points you have been making have constantly been redundant or irrelevant, and from what I can tell it's because you're enthusiastic about adding anything that you discover, even if it has no reason being there. I'm telling you to take a step back and consider whether something is necessary and correct before adding it. CookiesCreme 21:46, June 6, 2022 (EDT)

This edit summary

I believe what that edit was trying to say is that Isabelle is the first fighter whose playable debut in any capacity is a game that's not her own series (that being Mario Kart 8 DLC in early 2015).

Admittedly, I'm too strapped for time to check and see if a fighter released/revealed before her also had this distinction, but I can certainly say she's not the only one to have it, as like you said, Banjo first appeared as a playable racer in Diddy Kong Racing. The Jacketed Terrapin 03:36, January 30, 2023 (EST)

I mean, there is a large handful of characters that made their playable debut in Smash, which isn't their own series, so I think the point is moot regardless, if you as me. Aidan the Celebratory Gamer 12:32, January 30, 2023 (EST)

Even then, that feels like trivia for an Animal Crossing wiki than this wiki, since it has nothing to do with Isabelle in Smash. CookiesCreme 12:48, January 30, 2023 (EST)

Removing picture

Hi!

I was going through my smash wiki and saw a picture you uploaded a few years ago (thank you for your work btw!!!). For personal reasons I would like to have it removed. If you could contact me on Twitter for the link to the picture and maybe to know my reasons, it would be much appreciated. Here's my twitter handle : @Dia2B.

Thanks a lot in advance!

Dia2B (talk) 20:42, February 22, 2023 (EST)

I don't have the power to delete the picture from the wiki, but I've sent the info to the admins; they'll take care of it and may be the ones contacting you. CookiesCreme 21:14, February 22, 2023 (EST)

I tried sending you a DM to verify, but I keep getting a "message failed to send" error, you can try sending me a DM, or just @me if you can't either to verify this is you. After verification, the picture can be deleted without any additional reason provided, I'll just need to know if it's only that specific picture you don't want up or if you don't want any pictures of yourself on the wiki. Omega Tyrant 21:22, February 22, 2023 (EST)

Best Pikachu

Hello, I do not know much about editing, so I am very sorry if I am doing something wrong talking to you here, but I think you are right with your edit, although I think it would be better to say on the second part something like this "However, ShinyMark has recently shown in tournament play that he has had severe improvement over the past few months, and although ESAM is the best Pikachu play in Super Smash Bros Ultimate overall, that may change soon with time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.157.183.189 (talk • contribs) 20:38, May 27, 2023

First, I responded to your talk page post, so I won't be repeating how to properly post a talk page post.

Second, in my opinion your sentence is wordier and is only implying that ESAM may not be the uncontested best Pikachu right now, and as I've explained on ESAM's talk page, it's pretty clear that ShinyMark's results are on-par if not significantly better than what ESAM has in the same period. CookiesCreme 20:48, May 27, 2023 (EDT)

Adding a Tournament summary section to all new tournament articles

Hey there,

So basically my current complaint about a lot of the tournament articles is that the Trivia sections tend to get excessively long, and filled with stuff that should be written somewhere else in the article. For example, for GENESIS 8 and GENESIS 9 over half the trivia points should really be in their own section. My proposed solution is to make sure every tournament has a summary section where people can put significant info about the events that happened during the tournament. I did this for a lot of Melee tournaments when I was more active here but would like to keep it going as a standard if possible. I don't think this is anyone's fault in particular (because it's easier to add bullet points to Trivia instead of creating a new section entirely) but I think this would help keep things more organized overall.

In my ideal world every tournament article would look like EVO 2013, Apex 2015, or Get On My Level 2016, where the page has a summary of the main events that happened, and the Trivia is short and limited to interesting facts/coincidences, like Taylor Hicks at EVO 2013, instead of significant events relating to the bracket. (I added the Melee summary for GOML right after the tournament ended, and then someone else added the Smash 4 info later, so as long as a section is available I think people will catch on).

As such, would you be down to help me by creating a "Tournament summary" section for every new tournament (at least for majors)? I see that you've created a lot of the new tournament articles so I figured I'd ask you about it first. Awesome Cardinal 2000 13:54, June 3, 2023 (EDT)

I'm fine with it. In the past I had gripes with trivia in tournament pages that feel like they should belong in their own section, so I've been trying to write sections similar to tournament summary sections that you've mentioned, or at least have a summary of the tournament in the introduction (eg, Maesuma TOP 12 and Kagaribi 10). I do think it's a case-by-case situation though, since there are majors which seem to be relatively "normal"/don't have much to cover that couldn't be covered elsewhere, and for the most part anything below the level of major is also rather uneventful, but nevertheless I think a tournament summary section is certainly warranted especially for supermajors like Battle of BC. CookiesCreme 14:06, June 3, 2023 (EDT)

Great, thanks for you help Awesome Cardinal 2000 16:02, June 3, 2023 (EDT)

Two Things

Number one, I am sorry for inserting unnecessary trivia into Zero Suit Samus' article. Number two, how is the coincidental similarity between Zero Suit Samus and Yang Xiao Long (from RWBY) irrelevant to Smash or Zero Suit Samus' design? 86.18.61.190 09:26, June 23, 2023 (EDT)

Read SW:TRIVIA and SW:1RV, insert your shitty "trivia" again and you will be blocked. Omega Tyrant 09:38, June 23, 2023 (EDT)

First, "in a way" implies speculation, which we don't allow on the wiki.

Second, aside from looking similar and having similar skillsets, what does Zero Suit Samus have to do with Yang? They're two completely different characters from two completely different franchises, so not only is your trivia point literally doing nothing but comparing two characters of no relation, but you could also make the same point with any blonde-hair fighter in any media (and there are a ton of that, such as characters from this list I just pulled up), which instantly makes the trivia point moot and irrelevant.

Third, even if it's confirmed that Yang took her design from Zero Suit Samus, it has absolutely nothing to do with how Zero Suit Samus looks in Smash, nor does it even affect how Zero Suit Samus is designed. Rather, it's more so information that belongs on a RWBY wiki since it's talking about Yang's design, and Yang is a character that has no relation to Smash at all.. CookiesCreme 09:44, June 23, 2023 (EDT)

Recent tournaments

Hello, where did you find lists of recent tournaments like ones shown on UltRank 2023 article? StartGG won't show every other Smash tournaments that are either B+ or below. (i.e. Most non-US tournaments) CSR (talk) 13:24, July 17, 2023 (EDT)

I usually just use the UltRank TTS for Ultimate tournaments -- which lists most of the relevant Ultimate tournaments -- and MeleeStats's When's Melee articles for Melee. There is also Smash Calendar but I don't really use it. I do still use Start.gg's tournament search from time-to-time especially for reference but I often find it unreliable and glitchy. CookiesCreme 13:32, July 17, 2023 (EDT)

Who would've thought people are actually working on UltRank tournament lists and made a list of future tournaments. Thanks for the info, by the way. CSR (talk) 13:41, July 17, 2023 (EDT)

Thanks for all the tournament results updates

Hey, I noticed that the smashers' tournament results are often up to date within hours of results coming out. It's honestly impressive and goes a great ways to keep the wiki relevant. Thank you for the work you do. Lasercatte (talk) 21:40, October 25, 2023 (EDT)

Aw thank you for the compliment :) CookiesCreme 22:43, October 25, 2023 (EDT)

Ness (SSBU)

Hey there! It seems we have some differences on how to approach the Ness article, particularly with regard to his competitive positioning. It's better we hash those out here than get into an editing war. Just a few points I would like to make:

- Ness hasn't seen a large decline in results over time. He is still well-represented in tournaments.

- Gackt has become more consistent recently, with a strong showing at Genesis to back it up.

- Sonic is not a bad matchup for Ness. In fact, Ness is one of few characters to consistently give Sonix trouble. FOW, Gackt, and Scend have all taken sets from him.

- I think it's important to provide context for LumiRank's tier list. It's only one tier list, and it was heavily criticized by top players on social media. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Loomer (talk • contribs) 16:25, February 23, 2024 (EST)

First, sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

Second, I appreciate you bringing this to my talk page, but I should clarify some of the points I had made to my edits.

"Ness hasn't seen a large decline in results over time. He is still well-represented in tournaments."

I completely agree with this point: if we use the OrionRank/LumiRank statistics it shows Ness being a top 20 character even in 2023. Although this list has yet to be updated for the end of 2023 I wouldn't be surprised if Ness is still around there. My point, however, is that Ness's representation at majors (the top level) has not been as strong as before. Take 2022, or before the first tier list came out, where we saw the top 3 Ness players all place top 8 at least one major, and 4 Ness players in the top 100, including 2 in the top 50. Fast forward to 2023, after the first tier list came out, and Gackt is the only Ness player still placing top 8 at majors, and is also the only Ness player in the top 100, let alone top 50; Syrup is just outside of top 100 but his best performance that led to him being ranked that high (TBH 11 for example) were with Steve, while Scend has fallen to 128th and ATATA outside the top 150. Since players tend to only focus on the majors (since they are the most important events of the year), it's no surprise that Ness's poor performances correlated to Ness's drop on the tier list. But at the same time, I still brought up how Ness's regional representation still remains really good and he still pretty damn viable, which is why his placement on the tier list was debatable, with US and LatAm placing Ness 10-12 spots higher.

"Gackt has become more consistent recently, with a strong showing at Genesis to back it up."

This point was mainly geared towards 2023 Gackt, who went from 7th at Maesuma TOP 13 to 49th at Super Smash Con 2023 a few weeks later, then to 5th at Delfino Maza 2023 before placing 33rd at DELTA 5, then the rest of the season was rather mediocre for him (like should he really be losing to players like Iwashi or kept if he was able to overcome Maister 3-0 a few months prior). Even if we talk about currently, just a month before GENESIS Gackt placed 129th at Umebura SP 10. I do admit my wording should have been more precise but I wouldn't necessarily say Gackt is more consistent now, especially since the season is barely 2 months old at this point which isn't the greatest time frame to make a good decision.

"Sonic is not a bad matchup for Ness. In fact, Ness is one of few characters to consistently give Sonix trouble. FOW, Gackt, and Scend have all taken sets from him. "

This is completely on me because what I meant to say is that some of the characters that define the current metagame have tools that abuses Ness's worst weaknesses while they can also deal with Ness's projectile game, one of his best strengths. I'll try to give more context to this in future revisions. That being said, taking sets off a character does not necessarily mean the character is a good matchup. For example, Gackt's lifetime record against KEN is 3-17, and while a lot definitely is with Sephiroth, if we take the sets from before Sephiroth (or at least before 2022) it's even worse, at 1-12.

"I think it's important to provide context for LumiRank's tier list. It's only one tier list, and it was heavily criticized by top players on social media."

All tier lists have their fair share of criticism, like if I remember correctly the fourth Smash 4 tier list was blasted for some of its inaccuracies, but that's what comes with tier lists. As such, it's kind of pointless to say how the tier list was heavily criticized because all tier lists are heavily criticized to a certain degree, especially for a game like Ultimate where you have to rank 82 characters and have opinions from the entire world. In addition, I have seen a lot of the online criticism but some of it is rooted in misconceptions (like the belief that the one score that had Incineroar as 5th was counted where it was actually removed) so I do wonder whether they are valid criticisms or just uninformed, and top players can be very much uninformed (examples being Leo and Aaron not knowing who Yoshidora is and MVD still thinking Japan had a multiplier going into 2024 when the major Japanese regions haven't had one since 2020). Issues like that are why the wiki should try to have a more neutral point of view on a subject like this especially when this is the only tier list we can really accept: the other alternatives either have dubious sources (such as Game8 or EventHubs, if the latter is still a thing) or are just personal tier lists. At least LumiRank has a fully explained algorithm and was done by people with actual credentials, and if there are any super major criticisms (on the level of people criticising Smash 4's first tier list as being too early, which led to many abstaining their vote), it should be mentioned on the tier list's own page.

This about sums up why I made my edits. I do admit there are going to be things that you can improve in what I wrote, but I don't believe fully reverting it is a better alternative, especially since there should still be context as to why Ness fell from 40th to 47th between the two tier lists, which is still a decently large drop. CookiesCreme 17:06, February 23, 2024 (EST)

Hey! I appreciate your response. Your points are mostly fair; I do take exception to your point that perception of Ness has "only declined in the post-online metagame." I think this claim is overly negative and not really reflected in the data or the "vibe." The sentiment I have seen from players like Dabuz, Tweek, and Muteace is that the character is strong and still has room to improve. As you mentioned, Ness is still a popular character who performs relatively well in tournaments, especially at the local and regional levels. I think the wiki should reflect that.

As for Gackt, your point about consistency is fine with me. (If you noticed, I preserved some of it in my last edit.) However, it should also be noted that the average level of player in Japan is incredibly strong, and Gackt is still almost always getting Top 64. Even at the last Umebura, he was sent to losers very early by an Ice Climbers player and had to win numerous sets in Losers to place where he did. So yes, the 129th placement looks bad, but he actually won a lot of sets vs. good players at that event.

Regarding matchups, I think it's fine to point out characters who can exploit Ness' weaknesses (I did some of this in my own write-up), but I don't see why it's inappropriate to discuss matchups in a section about competitive play. If we can discuss Ness' poor matchups, why not list some of his good ones? That said, if you were advised this by a higher-ranking editor, I will respect that.

I'm fine with citing the LumiRank tier list, even though I personally don't like the list or the methodology. However, it's really only one data point and doesn't necessarily mean Ness is "worse" than the characters above him. (Is Ness really worse than Captain Falcon? Really??). I also think his decline on the second list has more to do with rising perceptions of other characters than falling perceptions of Ness. A similar argument can be made for his overall representation in tournaments. I think the absence of Ness in rankings is more about players of Ness becoming less active than the character actually getting worse.

Anyway, I appreciate the dialogue. I intend to make some further revisions while respecting your overall structure. I love this game and this character, and I want the article to be fair, well-written, and objective.

Thanks, Loomer (talk) 17:44, February 23, 2024 (EST)

Just a few things I will like to point out real quick:

"I do take exception to your point that perception of Ness has "only declined in the post-online metagame." I think this claim is overly negative and not really reflected in the data or the "vibe.""

I believe that's fair. My point was mainly that Ness's results have been on an overall downturn lately and "only" was a bit too charged. I do want to give a precaution to the "top player opinion" point; we don't want another "Pikachu is top 3" situation where top players have argued such but the results and representation did not back it up.

"but I don't see why it's inappropriate to discuss matchups in a section about competitive play"

The wiki has been cleansing information on matchups for a while now, mainly due to how volatile they can be, especially amongst other players. It's why we have since removed most if not all matchup charts from the wiki, and those that remain are likely due to archival purposes. That being said, when I try to discuss matchups I more so give a general idea as to what kind of archetype is good against another character. In the case of Ness, his range is poor, so I would say that characters that can outrange Ness can exploit that weakness. I don't give specific matchups due to the new wiki standards but I still give an idea as to how Ness's weaknesses can be exploited.

"However, it's really only one data point and doesn't necessarily mean Ness is "worse" than the characters above him. (Is Ness really worse than Captain Falcon? Really??)."

I think you may be looking into the numerical placements a bit too much. There's a reason why characters are generally placed in tiers rather than left alone in their individual numerical placements. I feel like this better summarizes my point.

"I also think his decline on the second list has more to do with rising perceptions of other characters than falling perceptions of Ness. A similar argument can be made for his overall representation in tournaments. I think the absence of Ness in rankings is more about players of Ness becoming less active than the character actually getting worse. "

I feel like this is where we mostly disagree, as I do believe Ness's results at the top level is definitely worse than it was in previous years, which as I said before was one of the reasons that factored into the drop. Ness's best players becoming less active is also true to an extent, but Ness didn't lose any of his biggest contributors to retirement: his biggest loss was either Awestin, FOW, or S1, but the former two were never actually ranked on any global ranking while at his peak S1's performances were never at the same level as Gackt, Scend, or even Syrup (OrionRank 2019 was more janky of a ranking compared to OrionRank 2022). Outside of this, I did also state that "Ness's top level results remained stagnant" and I believe that is probably the best way to put it. CookiesCreme 18:40, February 23, 2024 (EST)