User talk:Randall00

Hello, and welcome to RJM's talk page!

If you want to leave a message, please do it at the bottom and using headings for better formatting; you can do that by simply pressing the "add new" button on the top of this page. Also, don't forget to sign your messages by typing four tildes, like this: ~~~~

Attention!

As an avid SmashWikidian, I dislike fragmented discussions. If you leave a comment for me, I will most likely respond to it in here, in this same page, on my talk page, as an effort to keep the entire conversation in one place. By the same token, if I leave a comment on your talk page, please feel free to respond to it there, on your talk page. Remember, we can use our watchlist to keep track of when responses are made. At the same time, feel free to send an alert to me on this page about a comment you have left elsewhere.

Thank you!

User Block

A user named Hippie Nixon vandalized a major page (he put "Your Mom" as a playable character). I feel this user should be warned, or perhaps blocked. --Oxico 23:33, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks.

Thanks for helping me to improve the 1233's wiki article, looks very-very nice, thanks =) --Dyna 22:25, January 31, 2007 (GMT)

You're very welcome. I'm trying to do a general cleanup of the various Smasher pages since they tend to be the most lacking in overall quality. :^)

-- Randall00 22:46, January 31, 2007 (GMT)

Hey thanks Randall =] We still need to do Stevo and Mike D:

--Janitor 8:45, April 30, 2007 (GMT)

In time, in time. And they should be listed under Steve and Mike, as per the CCSC smasher profiles they filled out. -- Randall00 ^Talk 19:23, April 30, 2007 (GMT)

By the way Randall, did you get my CCSC smasher profile? i believe i filled it out. =]

--Janitor 11:00, May 5, 2007 (GMT)

Sandbox

You have two user sandboxes, one at user:Randall00/Sandbox, and one at user:Randall00/sandbox. Just wanted to tell you. – Smiddle ( Talk • Conts ) 19:30, February 23, 2007 (GMT)

Yeppers, more cleanup that requires administrative power, alas. -- Randall00 19:34, February 23, 2007 (GMT)

Wow.

How did you found out all that information on AngelCX? Is it simply because you checked out the TSA thread?

Anyway, it's pretty hot and amazing what you did there. Good stuff. --WarriorofZarona 15:56, April 5, 2007 (GMT)

Haha, thanks WoZ, I'm glad somebody notices the phantom poking around and studying that I do of other regional smash communities! I have a lot of admiration for The Smash Affiliates and the way you guys do things and I try and offer the same sort of philosophy at my own bi-weeklies. As to the stuff on AngelCX, I found most of the information just by viewing his posts. "Find all threads started by AngelCX" can take you pretty far when dealing with tournament directors and even the very roots of many reputable smashers can be dug up in the archived topics from the days of SWF's inception.

Nevertheless, the article isn't up to my own standards quite yet, as I was unable to easily track down his first name and age. :) -- Randall00 ^Talk 00:12, April 6, 2007 (GMT)

Template:ccsc

Hey it's Vic, for the Recurring Events in the CCSC thing you have on your page, you forgot to put CAST =( —Preceding unsigned comment added by [[User:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{1}}}|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/{{{1}}}|contribs]]) {{{2}}}

Oo, good catch; fixed now, thank you! -- Randall00 ^Talk 18:32, April 18, 2007 (GMT)

Sig

Perhaps you wanted this?

Randall00

The tags must be inside the caption, and there should be a cross in front of the numbers. – Smiddle ( Talk • Conts ) 19:41, April 23, 2007 (GMT)

Circuit Stuff

Hey I don't really know how to use this, but if you'd like to talk about the Circuit stuff, feel free to PM me on Smashboards. I'd love to work with you on it. KishPrime 15:13, April 24, 2007 (GMT)

I'll definitely send you a message in due time. My Circuit-related work just hit a rather large hurdle, though, so it might be a little while. Thankfully, I don't think the smash community is going anywhere. -- Randall00 ^Talk 17:06, April 24, 2007 (GMT)

Picture

Excuse me,but i wanted to know why you have removed my picture on my Article.Is it not allowed?

Or is it forbidden to have a picture without showing yourself?

thanks Super Mari0 13:28, May 4, 2007 (GMT)

I know im not randal but I'll tell you the answer. Its a policy on Smash wiki: Smashwiki is not the place for smasher and crew banners and other advertising images.

ToXn 15:00, May 4, 2007 (GMT)

Yes sir, these articles are not personality profiles and regardless of how flashy the banner is, it is unencyclopedic to include it unless it happens to have a particular impact on the smash community and its history in some way. In the same respect, articles should be focused on the facts in the text portion as well without diverting too much into inside jokes and useless trivia. -- Randall00 ^Talk 23:09, May 4, 2007 (GMT)

Thers one page cybr has tons of useless triva, should i edit it? I ask because if I do something to that page regarded as "vandalism", I will be banned due to my stupidness earlier on. ToXn 16:49, May 5, 2007 (GMT)

Well you just have to be smart about it. Think about it as an encyclopedia articles comprised of facts. Yes, you should be bold and edit articles that you think need editing, just make sure that they follow the standard format. If you're dealing with encyclopedic information, it is never vandalism. A lot of these articles are pretty bare right now so if the information is useless, it doesn't necessarily need to be removed so long as it's true to some extent, but if the article already has a fair amount of content (Like chestterr01), it doesn't need to list all of his four-letter nicknames in point form. Ideally, we want all the articles to have a fair amount of real content, but as with cybr and all of The Slashers, really, I question whether they should exist in the first place. Realistically, a smasher who just plays at home and happens to have the internet shouldn't have a SmashWiki article just because he "hopes to attend a tournament one day." But since we can't stop the inappropriate ones from being created without a lot of headaches and administrative power, we have to at least make them as good as they can be. -- Randall00 ^Talk 16:16, May 6, 2007 (GMT)

Well I edited it anyways. And your right about the whole articles thing the guy does not even play smash anymore yet he insists on still having an article. I know about 6 other pages that should be deleted and if I actually thought about it I could think of 10 more. IS there anyway like wikipedia to recommend an article for deletion? —Preceding unsigned comment added by [[User:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{1}}}|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/{{{1}}}|contribs]]) {{{2}}}

Well there's no policy in place at the moment. The problem is that it is an anti-communal sort of thing to say to go around telling people that they can't make their own articles. You can't really place a criteria on it to decide what's valid and what isn't. It might just make a lot of people angry, I don't know. Incidentally, we also now have articles like Knuckles that are turning into personality profiles....egh. -- Randall00 ^Talk 16:46, May 6, 2007 (GMT)

I've seen some articles with banners on them mainly http://www.smashwiki.com/wiki/Super_Smash_Mutants and the members of the crew have pictures (not of them) on thier smasher pages too. Is this considered unencyclopedic? --Insane-Contrast 23:53, May 18, 2007 (GMT)

Yep, those are the ones that should be removed. -- Randall00 ^Talk 23:27, May 20, 2007 (GMT)

Crew-Logo

Why musnt we have a crew-logo and NAS can get one? --Tham 15:31, May 22, 2007 (GMT)

Nobody is allowed to have a crew logo, unless of course it is actually pertinent to the encyclopedic documentation of the smash community. But that's extremely unlikely. -- Randall00 ^Talk 21:24, May 22, 2007 (GMT)

DoctorMarioBoy

hold on...so what exactly are you supposed to put in the alias section of the smasherbeta? For Ring Master 1337, i put "DoctorMarioBoy" because that was his smashboards account. I'm guessing i'm mistaken? --Janitor 19:38, May 26, 2007 (GMT)

SmashWiki:Smasher Project <- Guessing is problematic that way, yeah...besides, I'm fairly sure it was "Dr.Marioboy" anyway. Either way, I've certainly never heard of anyone by that name and if he's a significant smasher in the CCSC, odds are I'd probably know about it. -- Randall00 ^Talk 19:17, May 27, 2007 (GMT)

Hmm

So I take it from your user page you don't care much for the Pokemon franchise, based on your user page; While I'm not saying there's anything wrong with that, it just sorta seems to me nowadays that a player in general would have to like ALL the franchises in Smash Bros. in order to fully appreciate Smash Bros. games thematically, and since I try to appreciate all the Nintendo franchises in these games, I know I'll definitely appreciate Brawl to its fullest. :) Erik the Appreciator 03:00, July 4, 2007 (EDT)

...? Where do you get the notion that I don't care much for the Pokémon franchise? I've got a level 100 Oddish! :^) My only gripe with the franchise is how unimaginative and copious the sheer numbers of Pokémon creatures there are. They're running out of ideas. As a 255-hour veteran of the original Red Version, it just kinda sucks to see them go from creative designs like Scyther and Blastoise to the downright lazy "Poochyena" and "Purugly." -- Randall00 ^Talk 08:38, July 4, 2007 (EDT)

Oh! Sorry about that. The way your Mewtwo entry in your Suspected Roster Cuts was worded just gave that impression, amplified by the (obligatory of course) Pichu cut right below. Didn't occur to me you were merely an oldie-but-goodie junkie.

I aim to like every last one of the 493 species equally and thoroughly, and had succeeded in doing so with the third generation in recent years, though I do admit they did seem bland at first. I got to appreciating the 3rd generation Pokemon as much as the previous two by looking at all of their Pokemon card art at sites like Pokebeach.com, and also by looking at their living 3d models in GameCube games; It was almost surprising how much better fitting of the Pokemon motif they seemed afterwards. Poochyena's model and design actually makes it perhaps one of the best "common" designs around IMO. I had extremely lofty expectations for the fourth generation, and they were actually exceeded in the event; I find all of them absolutely excellent. But that's just me. :)

If anything's for certain, there'll be hell to pay if anyone bad-mouths my beloved Golden Sun series... when it comes out in Brawl. Mwahaha! Erik the Appreciator 13:31, July 4, 2007 (EDT)

Hehe, well you can like anything if you stare at it for long enough, but come on....Nosepass??? :^) -- Randall00 ^Talk 17:58, July 16, 2007 (EDT)

I like that Pokemon too because it dares to be different in the faces-er, noses of Pikachu, Togepi, the legendary birds/dogs, and other standard classics. And I judge a Pokemon's quality not just by appearance, but also by all its biological characteristics, which in Nosepass' case are quite interesting, and whatever evolutionary relations it might have make both it and its evolution more interesting. Meaning: I recently liked Nosepass a little better when it got its more interesting Probopass evolution, and currently I like Probopass better than Nosepass. (You can tell now why I gave myself this username, I'm sure. XD )Erik the Appreciator 02:20, July 17, 2007 (EDT)

Thanks!

Hey, thanks for randomly spiffying up my page; I feel rather flattered. Also, knowing how to classify my skill level ("Pro-Am") is useful as well. Zinth 23:51, July 6, 2007 (EDT)

GTM's Reply

I was just editing random stuff on the "small pages" list. You can delete them or whatever if you want, they're not my pages >_> GTM 18:14, July 30, 2007 (EDT)

Besides mine, im working on it >_> GTM 18:15, July 30, 2007 (EDT)

Umm...wtf?

You deleted my wiki. It was nice...why?

just because you made this doesn't mean people from smaller towns who are still damn good at the game can't have their own wiki.

I hope you die. I worked hard on that.

-chansen

If you, sir, had any idea what kind of contributions I have made to this wiki and how stunningly and embarrassingly selfish your comment is in that context, I would be more inclined to argue. However, I like to give people the benefit of the doubt and offer a little tolerance for those who are ignorant of the system, rather than wish death on them when failing to consider why they might have done what they did.

Please see your relocated article at Chansen. -- Randall00 ^Talk 17:52, August 10, 2007 (EDT)

"SmashWiki is not a personal profile"

Hi there, just want to clear something up. According to this article, you said that contact information shouldn't be posted on smasher articles and they should be put in user pages instead. Is it alright, then, if when I see contact information on an article, I can remove it with no warning? Or is it just a suggestion to those who are writing their own articles and I shouldn't bother with it? --YodaMasterZ 22:34, August 10, 2007 (EDT)

In light of recent events, I would suggest removing it and copying and pasting it to their talk page with something like: "As per SmashWiki:Smasher Project, I have moved your contact information off of your smasher article. If you would like to restore this information, please put it on your user page. -- Randall00 ^Talk 22:58, August 10, 2007 (EDT)

Thank you, I'll keep that in mind. In the future, would you rather I not delete my own entries if somebody else answers it? --YodaMasterZ 23:07, August 10, 2007 (EDT)

You put 'LunInSpectra' twice in your future projects

Just lettting you know - Insane-Contrast 23:08, August 10, 2007 (EDT)

Haha, thanks, I'll try to resist writing it twice! -- Randall00 ^Talk 02:00, August 11, 2007 (EDT)

My Page

No, but I wish I was.--Aipom for Brawl--

Hello.

What did you mean by putting "iiiiiiiinnnnteresting" on my clan's page?

-ethanrodgers223

It's not an article. It looks like one thanks to the built-in wiki formatting and page header titles, but it's really just a personal homepage pretending to be an article.

More specific? Well the History page is inarguably pitiful and reads like an interview/customer testimonial where the interviewee doesn't say anything and passively mentions how the "clan" "seems" to continue growing. The article goes on to mention the current number of members, presently sitting at 34, and then lists a grand total of 15, 9 of which have an asterisk beside their name with a legend at the bottom that says: "'*'"User is validating." ....wtf?

Moving right along, we jump immediately into the Comic section without any clarification about the sharp inconsistency between number of members or what "validation" exactly means. This comic thing you've got going sounds really good and interesting from a community point of view, actually, and it belongs on a SmashWiki crew article. However, it doesn't explain what the comic is and the entire section only makes sense if you're a member of this crew; even then, I'm sure at least one of the 34 members would be able to see how transparent and immature the writing is. After all, the fact that the clan members are the "stars" is not a "feature," nor is the fact that Luni a "notable" member, regardless of how many times he uses the word "blarg" in the story. And what's this "note from the author"? "Expect ninjas and giant demon pokemon soon"?? This isn't a news website and this isn't the place to go for your comic updates; it's an encyclopedia.

But wait, there's more!!! It seems that on August 24th of 2007, Omneox of Smash created an alliance with Dawn Patrol.....first of all, what the hell does that even mean? The Dawn Patrol article even mentions how half the people in that crew had forgotten that this "alliance" offering was even on the table. Then apparently it was "made official"--how? when? why? I would be stunned if you could show me 34 people who even know about it, never mind 15 who could answer any of those questions.

Then there's this mysterious little "Success" section, as though all 34 of you have been huddling around the DOJO spamming the Refresh button and determining whether or not this hypothetical idea of a clan that doesn't exist will be a success or a failure. The only piece related to the "clan" is four team pairings, three of which contain the same player, meaning that only two of these team pairings could possibly compete against one another. When in reality, the game hasn't even come out yet and the whole "Success" section is really nothing more than an announcement of Wi-Fi multiplayer support for Brawl. Which everyone already knows about.

My tone is critical, yes, and you're probably already getting defensive but I assure you, it's nothing personal. Your article is not even CLOSE to being the worst, but it's still not an encyclopedia article and I only went off on a tangent in the hopes of clarifying why and hopefully improving it in the future. Most of the writers at SmashWiki are not really writers; instead, they're smashers and unfortunately for the SmashWiki, a lot of smashers are a bunch of teenagers who don't have a lot of experience writing publication quality material for the masses.

The most important thing to remember when making or editing an article is that the article is for EVERYONE, not just the people in your town, not just the crew members, but everyone. So, once you've done your editing, read the article again, but think as if you didn't write it and you are reading it for the first time. Read Omneox of Smash with that mentality and you can see that it doesn't really tell you anything at all. SmashWiki is an information source for smashers, just as Wikipedia is an information source for people. On the English Wikipedia, even simple articles like Laughter explain the subject of laughing so that any English-speaking person can understand what it is, even if they've never heard of it. On SmashWiki, the article should be able to explain itself so that any English-speaking smasher can understand what it's about...even if they've never heard of it. I'm an English-speaking smasher and I had never heard of the Omneox of Smash before reading your article. Now I've heard of it, but I still don't understand what it is based on the information provided. And it's not because I'm an idiot; it's because the article fails.

Also, sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). It's good wiki protocol. :^) -- RJM ^Talk 15:42, October 3, 2007 (EDT)

-- RJM ^Talk 15:42, October 3, 2007 (EDT)

OF COURSE I'm going to critical! I'm sorry, but you have to be one of the most rude persons I've ever talked to. All I wanted to know was maybe you thought it was interesting or not, not go off into some unessessary page of mind-bogiling blows.

You think we just wait around the DOJO, clicking refresh? First of all, I don't even have a computer, I use my Wii browser, and it's kinda hard to set things up and type things out letter by letter. Besides, what else is their to put? We haven't had any experiences with crew battles or anything, because brawl hasn't even released yet.

Validating means they have sent our site( freewebs.com/omneox) an application, and then the leaders will dertimine wether or not they make it. When SSBB is released, we will play a couple of matches with them, via online, and based on their offense, defense, etc. mmmmmmmkk?

The reason the article was created was just to get prepared. Also, Omneox was first introduced on smashboards, which, and I know you will, search for it on the site. Our thread was closed, so we don't have much publicity. Yes, it is because your an idiot. (N.O.) It clearly states in the first paragraph:

Omneox Of Smash (or OOS for short) is a gaming crew primarily dedicated to the Super Smash Bros. franchise. The members are spread vastly among the globe, making actual gameplay difficult. They relate mostly through discussing the series on SmashBoards, and hope to be more closely connected through the confirmed online play in Super Smash Bros. Brawl. They plan on playing with and against each other casually and competitively. The crew is currently allied with Dawn Patrol.

That's everthing you need to know. The rest of the article just goes into futher detail. And DON'T use the word "teenager" the way you do, considering you are one yourself. Unless your some creepy 40 year old man.

I haven't updated this articles of the current members yet, because, once again, I have no computer. If you would be so kind as to go to our forums and put the members on there, then we wouldn't have a problem, would we. Heh, I thought we could have been friends. --—Preceding unsigned comment added by [[User:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{1}}}|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/{{{1}}}|contribs]]) {{{2}}}

Dude...whoa! :^) We don't have a problem, I already said it's nothing personal and I'm just telling you what's wrong with the article. Now the only person dealing blows is you calling me an idiot for not being able to understand what a gaming crew that doesn't actually play games is supposed to be and why it deserves a spot in competitive smash history. As to the "teenager" remark, I don't mean it disparagingly, but what I say is valid: most of them are not prepared to be writing encyclopedic material. Many adults are just as bad, but generally have a better sense of what's worth posting and what's going to die a slow death on an underviewed page on the internet.

No need to get all touchy and defensive just as I predicted, it's not really an argument you can win. Especially when failing to acknowledge the wide scope of individuals that lie between the spectrum of "teenager" and "40 year old man." -- RJM ^Talk 03:09, October 10, 2007 (EDT)

deletion

the validity of the cloud page is very unlikely. it just seems like a personal nickname and does not deserve it's own article. also, stop deleting pages that simply need clean-up. FyreNWater - (Talk • Contributions ) 17:56, October 14, 2007 (EDT)

I would've said the same thing about the cloud page when I first came to SmashWiki, but since doing so, I've been surprised at how pervasive the phenomenon is, with players all across Canada and down into some of the northern states like Pennsylvania. When I went to TransCanada to meet and network with a variety of community players, it was actually quite remarkable how well the name had stuck within smaller communities. Hehe, I mean, ultimately I don't care one way or another about the article, but to delete it when there's piles and piles of more important work to be done is just unnecessary policing of an unwritten policy. There's something to be said for the character and lifeblood of the global smash community when certain bits of unofficial lingo catch on like that. It represent a unique wholeness of common interest that I feel deserves to be documented. :^)

And believe me, I wish I could delete pages that "simply need cleanup", but alas, all I can do is mark them for deletion and then have to deal with the comments from the authors who take it personally when the material isn't pertinent to an encyclopedia. -- RJM ^Talk 23:25, October 14, 2007 (EDT)

What the hell?

Why did you delete all of the new content from the Brawl article? Everything has been seen plain as day in impression videos, and it has sources on their respective pages. You just erased about an hour's worth of work without thinking! -Thores 22:07, October 14, 2007 (EDT)

You're going to have to be more specific (and probably learn a thing or two about the way a wiki works). I don't recall deleting all of the new content from anything, frankly. I seem to remember removing a Little Mac reference once, owing to the fact that there doesn't seem to be any confirmation of that whatsoever. In any case, it's impossible to "delete" an hour's worth of work without thinking on a wiki, as all edits are stored in the 'history' section of the page. --RJM ^Talk 23:27, October 14, 2007 (EDT)

Seeing as there's no "revert/undo" option, it's a bit more of a pain to replace information here than most other wikis. And you didn't just remove the Little Mac reference, you also removed all the new items revealed in the demo (and those items DID have sources in their respective articles before you did so), and you also deleted Assist Trophies BESIDES Little Mac that did have sources (Jill and I think one other), and Poke Balls shown in the demo (though I think out of the ones you deleted, only Gardevoir had a source, so no big deal there). The point is that all took a lot of collective time to type from the combined contributors that put up the information, and then you erase it all without even checking for proof first, or bringing it up in the talk page. Yes, I can go back in the history and just copy/paste the stuff you deleted, but I shouldn't have had to. Please don't be so hasty in making your edits next time. -Thores 23:34, October 14, 2007 (EDT)

Listen, Thores, I know how to use discretion with my edits, but when piddling around on an article that a whole bunch of people are watching like a hawk and making ridiculous changes to on a daily basis, it's not surprising that more got deleted than I may have intended. But it's VERY SIMPLE to revert and undo changes. Exhibit A: The only edit I made on the whole article ever!

By clicking on Revision as of 11:08, October 14, 2007, it will take you to the older version of the article just prior to the changed I made. From there, select the handy-dandy "edit" tab from the top and VOILA! Mission comprete! I'll save you the trouble this time around, but thanks for pointing out the incorrect deletions. The only ones that I intentionally deleted were Little Mac and the Jill reference from Drill Dozer, so I have no idea what happened to the rest of them. Either way, it's a simple fix and nothing to get too riled up about.

You've taught me a valuable lesson though...I'm never editing a Brawl-related article again until the game's out already, Jesus! Can't do anything without upsetting a bunch of impatient fans. It's just a little depressing that of all the 800-some useful community-related edits I've contributed to this website, the only thing that gets noticed to be a big deal is some shoddy, unimportant change to a Brawl article. Ah well, the train keeps on rollin'. -- RJM ^Talk 23:48, October 14, 2007 (EDT)

Gee, thanks for informing little old me, but I already knew that, as evidenced by the following taken from my last reply: "Yes, I can go back in the history and just copy/paste the stuff you deleted, but I shouldn't have had to." That's all I was trying to say. And I DO notice all the contributions you make to this Wiki, and it's definitely appreciated because I know I wouldn't be able to contribute to the Smash-community-centric articles half as efficiently as you do. Which is partially why this particular edit annoyed me. You're usually a lot more careful and precise than that, so this seemed... out of character for you. If anyone else had done it, I'd probably just edit the stuff back in and go back to business. Anyways, yes, I see now that I've overreacted, but I'd still appreciate it if you took the condescending tone elsewhere next time. -Thores 00:17, October 15, 2007 (EDT)

Again, no copying and pasting is required, but right, I mean nothing by the tone, I'm just getting really tired of this crap on my talk page, because it encompasses such a small portion of what I actually put time into. Not your fault and nothing personal, but I can only dress up my public relations for the audience as a whole for so long before actually trying to make a point. Too many anonymous warriors on the internet try to use condescending tones against me just to try and win over the argument with aggression, whereas I prefer to supply some logic along with it. Messages tend to get lost when things start looking like insults, so I try to avoid them; but like I said, I can only be pushed so hard. -- RJM ^Talk 01:34, October 15, 2007 (EDT)

Smash Trophy

i totally blanked out and forgot that i have a free assignment in my 3D Art class. i have access to a wood shop and a metal shop. if you're interested, i can make something out of that. it will take more time and cost more, but i think it'll turn out quite nicely. FyreNWater - (Talk • Contributions ) 17:16, October 22, 2007 (EDT)

Time is running short, so it really depends on how quickly it could be completed and what it would cost. It's for a tournament in the middle of December, which is already a pretty high-budget event. I've anticipated having to make the trophy on my own, but let me know the details! :^) --RJM ^Talk 17:22, October 22, 2007 (EDT)

alas, metal doesn't look very likely. i tried to weld today and was intimidated by lighting the freakin' torch. i think it's safer for me to stick with wood &/or clay. middle of December doesn't look too good. that's when i start my break. but feel free to contact me for future pieces! FyreNWater - (Talk • Contributions ) 20:31, October 23, 2007 (EDT)

Thanks

Thanks I appreciate Your support for the SSF article. Have you played it yet? The Chosen 11:05, October 23, 2007 (EDT)

No I haven't. Mostly because the article doesn't link to the game at all! :^) I'll have to run a search for it later on to give it a whirl. -- RJM ^Talk 12:34, October 23, 2007 (EDT)

---

this is ethan, why did u change my skill level???!!! Don't edit my page, please.

"Please note that all contributions to SmashWiki may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then don't submit it here." See here for reasoning. Also, signing your comments with four tildes (~~~~) is a good start to life in the wiki. --RJM ^Talk 09:26, October 24, 2007 (EDT)

Did you notice no one answered my question at the bottom of your link?

And thank you for trying to help my Omneox Of Smash page, but you put plenty of incorrect information....such as the members.

Ethanrodgers223 14:20, October 24, 2007 (EDT)

What question under what link? I do a lot on here.

With regards to Omneox Of Smash, I didn't put any "incorrect" information, I put all of the information I could find in the hopes of not confusing a reader who comes to see the article. SmashWiki is not a homepage and therefore is not the primary source of any information. It all has to be referenced elsewhere. Earlier on this very same talk page, you said this:

"If you would be so kind as to go to our forums and put the members on there, then we wouldn't have a problem, would we."

I registered an account on your forums, explored the main website portion very thoroughly and, as you requested, "put the members" on your article, as per the member list on your webpage. I also had earlier questions about your "validation" procedure, which was previously unexplained on the SmashWiki article; much to my surprise, there's no explanation on the official page either! In fact, the only explanation for what it takes to be a "validated" member is the one provided on this talk page, in the form of a sarcastic reply as though it should've been common knowledge. It's interesting to me that you would reference the "members" portion of the article as the incorrect part of my edits, when previously it listed 34 members and only listed 15. I have to assume that this number was pulled from the total list of registered members on your forums which is NOT the same thing and if it were, then the only "validation" required to join is to have a functional e-mail address. Hopefully your rebuttal doesn't come back to the number of forum users versus actual crew members, but just in case it does, there's a simple solution by including stats related to forum activity in a separate part of the article. --RJM ^Talk 16:31, October 24, 2007 (EDT)

About Sheik...

Apparently, you believe that Sheik will not appear becuase Sheik only appeared in OoT, correct? So did Farore's Wind and Din's Fire (and used by Link, not Zelda), and we've seen Zelda use those in Brawl. Just because we've seen nothing of Sheik doesn't mean that Sheik won't be in. I mean, why else would they not have Zelda as a playable character in the recent demo version? To hide the new Sheik, obviously. I'm not trying to personally attack you here, but I see that you don't think that Sheik will get into Brawl, and you want to delete the SSBB article on her (even though Ganondorf (SSBB) simply has an "unverified claims" tag). I simply want to reason with you on why Sheik (SSBB) should not be deleted without Ganondorf (SSBB) or why neither should be deleted. Teamrocketspy621 15:28, October 24, 2007 (EDT)

I believe they both should be deleted until someone actually knows what's going on. Or rather, I suppose my true belief is that they shouldn't have been created in the first place based on such sloppy information and whereas I believe Ganondorf will return and Sheik will not, I never re-tagged the Sheik article after creating Template:Speculation specifically for inclusion on Ganon's article. I have no problem doing that; just a little surprised that the Sheik crusade called me on it! :^) The bigger problem at hand is that while it's probably true that there's no reason to delete an article that is likely to exist (like Captain Falcon (SSBB)), there isn't exactly a lot of actual deletion going on at SmashWiki. Therefore, articles that have no place even from a speculative point of view (see: North Pole) create an enormous amount of clutter that will create an equally enormous amount of work for SysOps (if they get around to hiring anymore), or just die a slow junk mail/spam-style internet death (if they don't). It can be frustrating to invest time into the quality control of a community-written website only to realize that without likeminded individuals in the administrative seat, you really have no control over the consistency of your contributions.

On a lighter note, I also have a slightly skewed bias against Sheik, as I believe she is a lifeless, androgynous half-character that has no business being one of the strongest and simplest playable figures in Melee, cheapening the countless hours of training invested by more technical players who industriously work to perfect their game just to get fair'd in the face. So forgive me, but as a Luigi player, it is my duty to use every fighting breath I have to prevent Sheik from ever coming back...even if it is only in the form of a garish pink delete tag! :^) Thanks for the comments. --RJM ^Talk 16:06, October 24, 2007 (EDT)

Thanks for understanding. I tried my best not to sound rude, and I'm glad that we can agree on this conundrum. Agreed, it does make sense not to delete likely pages, but there's the whole "speculation" thing, and how something likely won't necessarily happen. Teamrocketspy621 19:26, October 24, 2007 (EDT)

What's Down? XD

Hey I have just Remove the Frase and Comedy section in my page, can you tell me the other things that I need to fix? (Like Grammar errors)? --Fandangox 20:43, October 26, 2007 (EDT)

Haha

Thanks for going around fixing my stuff randall, I appreciate it :D SleepyK 21:14, October 30, 2007 (EDT)

Lol, didn't know that at first. thankyou for your support.

"insane gayness"

thanks for the edit about the gayness :D it sounds alot better ^^ and propably half of the people reading it wont understand :D--—Preceding unsigned comment added by Yomi (talk • contribs) {{{2}}}

You should learn to sign your comments Yomi.
--$hYne 17:54, November 10, 2007 (EST)

Some ideas

Hey RJM ima copy some of your ideas in order to create a decent Bi-weekly and smash circuit article, i hope you dont mind . If you do please let me know. P.S. Great sc template ;) --$hYne 11:06, November 11, 2007 (EST)

Please do! I'm a community-oriented sorta guy and I'm always happy to see more competitive structure get built into smash. It's lookin' pretty good so far, keep it up. :^) --RJM ^Talk 13:32, November 11, 2007 (EST)

Lol

Well this time i was right. huh?

0.0

An alias can harm the wiki rally? I didn't know that, how can an alias harm a wiki (unless have an inslut), and about the 4 members I read something about that in the forums.--Fandangox 21:07, November 18, 2007 (EST)

Template:smasherbeta -- The "aliases" listed were only gamer tags and the alias field on that template is built specifically for gamers who are known by two different names. For example, in earlier smash circles, Isai often competed and was known by Malva00, and so it appears in his table. A bunch of nubs changing their tag in-game every second match is not the same thing. :^) As a further example, I compete under RJM, but I registered on the forums as Randall00 long before I was a competitor. Because I organized local tournaments through the forums, a lot of people came to know me as "Randall00", and so it appears in my alias field as well despite not actually being my competitive name. --RJM ^Talk 21:12, November 18, 2007 (EST)

Ah then sorry for that, I don't speak to much english and form where I'm from an alias is a nickname.--Fandangox 21:16, November 18, 2007 (EST)

Congrats

And welcome to the club :) --nealdt 22:14, November 28, 2007 (EST)

YOU ARE A SYSOP NOW! WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO? -I'M GOING TO MY HOUSE AND WATCH TOY'S STORY - OH BOY! TOY'S STORY CAN I COME? - HELL YEAH! well seriously congratulation randal now you are a sysop.--Fandangox 22:17, November 28, 2007 (EST)

Congrats Randall, you really earned it. --– Janitor ( Talk • Contribs) 18:35, November 29, 2007 (EST)

About time, you obviously deserved it. Congrats on the position! User:EPX2/sig 19:35, November 29, 2007 (EST)

Way to go, Randall. Knew you'd get the promotion. =D Teamrocketspy621 19:55, November 29, 2007 (EST)

Gannondorf

Why did you delete the page for Gannondorf? It seems odd that a character in Super Smash Bros. Melee couldn't have a page. I may be wrong, though I've searched to look for a page of him. -Thedude3445

Uh, his name is actually spelled Ganondorf. Some people add that extra n for reasons I will never understand. Teamrocketspy621 16:43, December 4, 2007 (EST)

The delete page redirected to a non-existent page that I assume was once a page for a smasher who deliberately misspelled the name. As Teamrocketspy pointed out, the page for Ganondorf is alive and well. --RJM ^Talk 16:56, December 4, 2007 (EST)

Hm, now that I think about it, maybe Gannondorf ought to redirect to Ganondorf. I think I'll go do that now. Teamrocketspy621 17:15, December 4, 2007 (EST)

AME results

Hey, hit me up on AIM (neal yung) next time you're online. I might be able to help recover your AME results. --nealdt 16:39, December 19, 2007 (EST)

Deletion

Hey, I recently found out you deleted "The Rape Staff" Article I had made. Though I'm not going to argue for it to be put back on. I will say that you were half right in deleting it, but half wrong as well. So instead of arguing, I feel more inclined to at least get back the information we had put into the article. Would that be possible? Elysium

Crystal_lucario

I don't know how to ban, so I ask you. Can you please ban User:Crystal_lucario? I have written the reasons on his talkpage. - User:King M 27th December 2007 15:03 (GMT +01)

Cut it out seriously your vandalizing! ~Crystal_Lucario 09:14, December 27, 2007 (EST)

1. You can't ban, as you're not a sysop.
2. None of what either of you have done is vandalism; learn the difference.
3. Don't be ridiculous; you don't campaign for someone's banning over a little disagreement and minor edit war. Both of you need to stop acting so immature over this issue. – EP (Talk • Edits) 09:17, December 27, 2007 (EST)

Omneox=Odyssey

Hey!

Its Ethan again.

I was wondering if you could edit the article "Omneox Of Smash" based of the information from our new forums: www.z3.invisionfree.com/The_Odyssey

See, Omneox fell apart. People started leaving, and a SWF user named RDK(Red Darkstar Kirby) logged onto my site (Omneox Forums) and deleted everything...so, most of my members panicked and left, so I just created a new crew. Called "Odyssey."

So, can you change it? Please? Ethanrodgers223 20:26, December 30, 2007 (EST)

I didn't write the article in the first place, so it's not exactly my responsibility to keep it up to date; that rests with you. Though, the fact that someone was able to log into your website and delete everything is further evidence that this crew of yours never really existed in the first place. Giving it a new name and hoping the "members" will come back probably won't change this.

Every article should have a move tab in the upper right hand corner beside "edit" and "history" and all that. Move Omneox Of Smash to The Odyssey and then update the information accordingly. *thumbs up* --RJM ^Talk 14:48, December 31, 2007 (EST)

Template

I need help creating Template:Crewbeta. can you help? --—Preceding unsigned comment added by Pikazilla (talk • contribs) {{{2}}}

It's on my to-do list, yes. But it would be at Template:Crew, more likely.--RJM ^Talk 20:13, January 5, 2008 (EST)

That was one of my ideas, it is in thr pool room section, at least someone listent to me.--Fandangox 14:26, January 5, 2008 (EST)

I moved it to Template:Crew. Feel free to continue dev there. =) --Sky (t | c | w) 03:00, January 23, 2008 (EST)

Hippochinfat still at it

Still vandalizing and flaming despite your warning. Magiciandude 16:20, January 11, 2008 (EST)

He's also banned at SWF... time for him to go bye-bye. Also, don't forget about Special: Contributions/Hutsetsugen!. – EP (Talk • Edits) 18:55, January 11, 2008 (EST)

User: Billy Kong

He have been replacing the Tier List article with == Tier List Don't exist!== I thing we should warn him, or if he do it again, ban him, Oh and yiu have something in your "to do list" that I can do? Its been quite a while since I really helped this wiki.--Fandangox 18:43, January 11, 2008 (EST)

No use warning him, take a look at his contributions page. He's obviously only interested in vandalizing SmashWiki so away he should go... – EP (Talk • Edits) 18:56, January 11, 2008 (EST)

Wiki issues

I think the site have some connection problems and issues, some users cannot upload images and take to much time to load the site, Two weeks ago my pc didt let me enter to the site. is this happening to everyone?--Fandangox 17:23, February 2, 2008 (EST)

Yes. This is related to the very same lag issues they are suffering at Smash World Forums, as the two websites are hosted on the same server. Due to the anticipation of Brawl's release, there's been extremely high traffic at the boards and it's been putting a lot of stress on the servers. That's actually a big part of the reason why I haven't been doing as much wiki work as usual. The boards are working well today, but I haven't heard as to whether or not they've found a permanent fix quite yet. --RJM ^Talk 11:13, February 3, 2008 (EST)

Thanks, I didnt know that the servers could suffer the same issues.--Fandangox 13:21, February 3, 2008 (EST)

Email change?

I'd like my email address changed, please.

From John_93@dbzmail.com

To wolfdonnell@yahoo.com

(Lavaris 02:55, February 4, 2008 (EST))

Hi there! Actually, your SmashWiki e-mail address and account are all tied to your Smash World Forums account. To change your e-mail, go to your User CP at SmashBoards and choose "Edit Email & Password" from the column on the left. If you're logged in already, just click here! --RJM ^Talk 09:51, February 4, 2008 (EST)

MediaWiki:Newarticletext

It eems to be some problem with the special pages Newarticletext and Namespace Number MediaWiki. Can you fix it? King M (talk•contribs•logs) 17: 41 (GMT +01) 7th February 2008

Was this all fixed before I noticed it? I don't really understand what the problem is. Where did all those templates come from anyway? Is there still an issue? --RJM ^Talk 22:21, February 8, 2008 (EST)

Email

I did what you said to do. However, my email is still the undesired one. Even after I changed it. Could you please edit it here for me? (Lavaris 22:49, February 8, 2008 (EST))

Please

Please change my email Randall..I did at SWF already, and my email is still the unprefered one at SmashWiki.

(Lavaris 03:34, February 13, 2008 (EST))

I'm still looking into that one, sorry man. It's not actually within my power; I'm pretty sure I would need to have access to the raw files on the server which is still well above me. I've left a message with the administration to look into it and haven't heard back yet, but I'll stay on top of it and let you know. :^) --RJM ^Talk 23:02, February 13, 2008 (EST)

Thank you Randall. (Lavaris 00:04, February 24, 2008 (EST))

Layout?

Do you mind if I use the layout on your userpage for my page? (Lavaris 00:05, February 24, 2008 (EST))

Tech VS Ukemi

How come you changed it back? I figured we went by official Dojo names for moves and techniques. (When there are official names, anyway.) FyreNWater - (Talk • Contributions ) 05:53, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

It was a double-redirect. --Randall00 23:10, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, YOU re coming back

OK I also didnt like the merge, but I'm getting used to it, dont tell me you will never comeback.--Fandangox 01:27, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

oh wait I got confused, you were quoting someone else?--Fandangox 01:31, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes. I agreed. This merge is the most insulting thing Smash World has ever done to me, and that's saying something. --Randall00 12:46, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Maybe you are exagerating??? that cannot be the worst thing. This is just a stupid merge, if you are never comingback that's your (stupid) choice.--Fandangox 13:02, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

That is my comment <.<' Now I'm kinda embarrased...Sorry I don't know how to spell if embarrased is spelt wrong... --User:Crystal_lucario 11:37, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Your comment is valid, I don't see why you would be embarrassed. I can remove it if you like, but it expresses my sentiments pretty well. --Randall00 21:14, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

No it's fine...~Crystal 15:27, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

awwww come here let me hug you guys (>'.')>. Hey you guys are acting like if they would have somewhat insulted you, is just a merging of two wikis, that's it, if you ask me, the only downside to the merge is that everyone can edit it now (more vandalism) the wiki is just as always.--Fandangox 19:27, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

All you're doing by saying these things is proving that you have no concept of what SmashWiki was and what went into it before this merge. It is inarguably insulting to the creators. --Randall00 03:15, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Hug back (^'.')^ lol. And the merge did insult me. It is so insulting with all the Spam and me hating wikia(Mainly because of Spam) (no offense(DONT BANZ MEZ! ^(0.o^) lol. Wikia is not the gov.)) and all that...~Crystal 19:53, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

There's no point in trying to convince you more, its obvious that you guys wont change your mind. (thanks for hugging back :))--Fandangox 21:19, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Would you please get all this "hug me, hug back" crap off my talk page, please? It's great that you don't take this seriously, but you didn't lose half the crap I did and I don't appreciate people who don't know what they're talking about coming on here and telling me that I'm exaggerating and everything is just as it was but with MOAR. --Randall00 03:15, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Petition to unmerge! Sign!~Crystal 21:08, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

That's nice and all Randall, but the problem is that you just left a quoted and no explanations, people will get the wrong impressions you should atleast give a reason.

I'm not going to sit and write a multi-page diatribe explaining why this was a bad idea. It is very clear to me that I've already wasted an awful lot of my writing on SmashWiki and my participation from here on out encompasses little more than ensuring that the competitive community's articles are not destroyed and that my own contributions remains relatively intact until I reserve some time to port them off the wiki.

Randall, if I might enter, KingKirby was able to salvage the watchlists from SmashWiki, so if you're still concerned about that, leave him a talk page message or a pm. --Sky (t · c · w) 21:31, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, Sky, the wiki is yours (if this really is what you call a "dream come true"). Smash World does not deserve my skill set. And before we get some more randoms coming in here telling me "it's just a merge!", please note that this is only one administrative folly in a series of them that have continually pushed me further and further away from Smash World over the last two years, despite my steadily increasing level of support and input. --Randall00 02:47, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Heh, I wasn't asking for opinions, only telling you that you can get your watchlist back, as I was fairly certain that was one of the items you were mad about. I'll leave you to yourself now. :) --Sky (t · c · w) 04:20, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Wazzup dude!

Just seeing how you doing. Zmario 21:35, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Hehe, interesting time to ask, so in the interest of not giving you more information than you need to know, we'll just say I'm doing better than I was two days ago. --Randall00 02:47, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Random...~Crystal

What's up, Randall? I know we've had some rough times since I first created my account, but I just wanted to let you know that I'm sorry for anything I could've done to offend you or anybody else. I'm usually not that obnoxious, but these last few days have been a little stressful. Anyway, I'm just hoping that you can forgive me for any wrongdoings. Hopefully, we can leave all that tension behind us and move on. What do you say? Truce? - GalaxiaD 01:10, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Don't worry about it, dude, I don't even really remember exactly what you did because nothing that I do on SmashWiki is personal by any means--if there's no war, there's no need for a truce. Moreover, I admire that despite anything wrong that you feel you may have done wrong, you are still willing to contribute and make this the best it can be. Showing the initiative to improve and contribute is very valuable and although you shouldn't feel the need to apologize to me, I recognize that as a respectable trait nonetheless--it sure is better than the hoards of people I've had to work with who refuse to even admit when they are wrong. I apologize if what I've said across the board in the last little while comes off sounding a little bitter and angry, but that's generally how I feel about this merge in the first place. I never would've been making this many unintentional enemies if it didn't happen. Keep at it! --Randall00 07:27, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Cool. I'm glad we were able to clear all that up. I'm not the type who goes out trying to make enemies out of everybody, and holding grudges can get nasty, so I just wanted to make sure you didn't hate me or anything. Now that I know that you don't, I won't have to watch my back anymore when I'm walking the streets at night (LOL). Anyway, I just wanted to say that you are a very knowledgable person, and despite what the merge may have done to you, you should keep doing a great job here at SmashWiki as well. Keep up the good work, Randall! - GalaxiaD 00:48, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

What's Up?

How are you doing, Randall? We haven't spoken in a while, so I decided to catch up on a few things with you. I'm doing fine. Just hanging around and doing my thing, you know? Keep on smashing and keep it real. - GalaxiaD (talk) 05:26, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Ike and Galaxia

I didn't realise that we weren't allowed to disuss sysop nominations on talk pages, or hold long conversations on talk pages. And I'm not gonna nominate myself, I thought i made that pretty clear...Ike6481 (talk) 18:14, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

I didn't say anything of the sort. What I said was, you have your conversation fragmented across two talk pages instead of leaving it on one (like this). ALL of your conversations are like that, which makes them very confusing to read. Read the heading that I have at the top of this page. Using your watchlist keeps discussions all in one place instead of having to bounce across a bunch of different talk pages trying to piece together a conversation. --RJM ^Talk 18:20, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Right, I see. So have all our convos on one talk page. I then asume it would be illegal to creat apage just for the prpose of our conversation? Right, I'll bear your comments in mind. Sorry, for making it confusing, for you and whoever else may decide to read it. Ike6481 (talk) 18:26, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Well, you don't need to create a page just for the purpose of your conversation--that's what the talk page is for in the first place! Your entire conversation with Galaxia should just be on one talk page under its own heading, just like this one, that's all. --RJM ^Talk 18:29, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Convos

On GalaxiaD's talk page, you noted that the important conversations should not be fragmented. In what way is our conversation important? All the current Sysops post unimportant things on other talk pages. There is no need to become so angry because you are struggling to read our conversation. It is ours, and we should be able to talk how we like. If this were in person, it's be like you eavesdropping and then making fun of our accents. Ike6481 (talk) 23:18, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Yeah you should really calm down.It is not that big of a deal. Zmario (talk) 23:22, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm not attacking anybody, actually. I'm trying to teach you all how to use a wiki so that when (or perhaps "if") you actually do decide to contribute something more useful to the back end community, you won't be left in the dark. In the same respect, standardizing the way a talk page is used sets a proper example for new users who actually do want to contribute.

Don't get me wrong, you can post all the "unimportant" stuff that you want. I think it's good to have trivial conversations in order to establish a community-like environment and encourage people to want to spend more time here. However, it would be best if that same positive energy and encouragement could be expressed in the methodology as well. It will make things easier for everyone. --RJM ^Talk 23:26, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Now what will make it easier is that if you would speak English instead of using your enhanced vonacular so peopel can understand you. Zmario (talk) 23:30, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

English is the only language I speak. It's not my problem if you only understand half of it. --RJM ^Talk 23:43, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

And when we discuss a character, for instance, we will talk in the character talk page. Since our convos do often drift away from the Smash Bros universe, we have nowhere to put it but on the talk page. And we don't care if it's fragmented, we just post on the other's talk page so that it saves room on our individual talk pages. And if we were to put it all on one talk page, who's would we put it on? And since we don't care, you shouldn't. I mean, it's our convo, and now that i'm talking to you, i'm putting it on your talk page since that's what you like. It's a matter of preference really. Ike6481 (talk) 23:35, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

What are you talking about? If your conversations about characters drift away from the smash universe, then you put it on your talk page, it's very simple--it doesn't matter which one of your talk pages it goes on--just pick one! The only justification I'm hearing for splitting them between TWO talk pages is because it "saves space." Which it doesn't. It's the same amount of text either way, people--what good is saving space on a talk page anyway? You can archive them when they get too long--wikis are built for this sort of thing! Just because you don't care doesn't mean that a fragmented conversation is the right way to do it and it doesn't mean that I shouldn't care because this isn't your website. SmashWiki is not free webspace--it has a purpose and it has conventions built around that purpose; if you choose to ignore those conventions, there's no guarantee that the community will support what you choose to do with this webspace. --RJM ^Talk 23:43, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Yes, and your only argument is that it's what's meant to happen because it makes things 'Easier to read'. What will the community fail to supprt us for? Our runs for Sysop? Like I ever would. So that doesn't bother me. Our talk pages are sort of, well, ours. And we should be able to chat however we find simplest. Why should we do things how Sysops want them to be done, just so that it makes it easier for other people to read. We prefer to talk over the talk pages, so that we get the new message template. Yes, there's a watchlist, but that's VERY DIFFICULT to see! And what if one of us went away for a bit, as we often do. The watchlist wouldn't show our edits. Yes, we could just check the page we were talking on, but why make things more difficult and timewasting? Which is all what your argument is about. Difficulty. How hard is it to just not care about what we're putting. It is of no real importance to the smash community. It's of importance to us. We've been doing it for ages, and I don't see why we should change because one sysop is finding it difficult to read! In what way does it concern you? It's not like it is imperative for our convos to be on one page. It's not like it takes up more room on the wiki. There is no need for concern. Ike6481 (talk) 23:52, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but your argument is just transparent. There is nothing difficult about maintaining a watchlist. You click "my watchlist," it shows you the changes since you last logged in bolded and sorts everything chronologically. You speak as though you want your talk page to behave like a chatroom, flashing at you every time a new message comes in. But that's not what it's for, it's for keeping a record of conversation as it pertains to the article it is associated with in the main namespace. I obviously can't convince you that it's the better way to do things, but what I'm saying is, you can't go making a run for SysOp status and simultaneously support fragmented discussion. The two concepts have to jive with one another if you hope to make a case. --RJM ^Talk 00:04, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Alright, there's nothing difficult about maintaining a watchlist. That's great. We understand OUR conversations. And this is what you seem to be failing to get. They are OUR conversations. Why should we make it easier just so that some SysOp wants to read them? And then complain about every tiny error. And since when did you see me making a run for SysOp? Never, cos i wouldn't be good at it. So don't tell me off for attempting to do something i've not yet done, or planned to do. These fragmented discussions, it seems to be your biggest pet hate, but why? When me, Galaxia, Zmario and Kperfekt are talking, why are you getting annoyed? I don't look down your talk page and note down ever error in order to build up an argument, and then comment upon it in a massive speech. You are not a better person than me. You have no right to comment on how I do things that have no negative impact on anyone or anything. You think that being a SysOp gives you ultimate power. While it may make you more 'important' on this Wiki, it does not make you right. Look at people in power around the world. Brown, Bush, Mugabe, power does not equate to rightness. If you wanted to complain because i'd been swearing all over the place that'd be fine. But you are complaining because you don't understand a conversation that never concerned you. And i'd have to say that swearing is a greater offence that a discussion over several talk pages. After all, this is a Wiki for all ages. In future, please try to refrain from breaking the Wiki conventions. Ike6481 (talk) 00:14, 22 June 2008 (UTC) PS: Looking over more than one page is a bit tricky.

Don't nitpick my words or my intentions. This entire thing has been blown out of proportion by GalaxiaD's insistence that my opposition of his SysOp nomination is the sole reason he won't get selected. That opposition involves an objective analysis of how a talk page should be handled in the wiki community for constructive purposes. Building a constructive community is built up of many smaller working parts, including an efficient framework for back end discussion. It's not as though fragmented discussion is my most passionate hatred and I lose sleep over it at night--no, it's just one of those smaller working parts to build a larger functional machine. I have no interest in reading the fragmented conversation in question, I'm only concerned with suggesting a superior way of laying it on the page (especially when there's a potential SysOp in question). It's not important to you, but it just happens to be important to the SysOp nomination process.

The second half of your post here is very confusing to me. I don't know where you get the notion that I believe that SysOp status gives you ultimate power--it absolutely does not and it probably gives you a whole lot less power than most of the current nominees think it does. But then you start talking about politics and swearing and telling me not to "break the wiki conventions" as though there's a list somewhere. I'm not sure what it's all for, but I've endured enough abuse by trying to help for one day, I think. No more personal attacks on this issue, please. My patience is tried and I will punish as ruthlessly as my petty SysOp status allows. --RJM ^Talk 00:34, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Please stop talking to me about Sysop nominations. I never planned to run. Being helpful? You think that banning someone who has, in actuality, made NO personal insults, and is staating his opinion just as you state yours. If i get banned, it would only be fair that you got banned, as I have done nothing worse than you. And i'm not talking to you abot GalaxiaD's nomination. I'm talking to you about this droning insistence that i've broken some kind of law, by stating my opinion and having fragmented discussions. No other Sysop got mad at us. No other Sysop posted long speeches at us. And why is it a superior way? So that we can what, go back to it? It's not difficult at the time. And quite frankly, if anyone is trying to read our conversations, then why should we make it easier for them? There are Wiki conventions, you know that as well as I do. No personal insults, no swearing, no joke pages. I never said Sysopness gave you ultimate power. It gives you the power to block me. Even though I have done nothing worse than me. So deny that banning me would be an abuse of power. If a non Sysop had done what you did, they'd get moaned at in a second Haha, i've not responded to your points in order.Ike6481 (talk) 00:44, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

That's enough. I am talking about SysOp nominations because that is the ONLY thing that this is about, so please stop insisting that I'm here to abuse power and put words into my mouth trying to make it look like I'm here to control your speech and dictate your lives. I have accused you of NOTHING, said NOTHING to deserve such a convoluted outburst and seen NOTHING from you that indicates that you are coming on to my talk page to do anything but start a fight. You are as uninvolved with the original issue as I was; the difference is that I owe the wiki a certain responsibility in terms of maintaining a quality standard throughout the community and when a SysOp candidate (remember: the ONLY issue at hand) is splitting conversations between two talk pages, I consider it beneficial to him and his potential nomination to understand how that methodology works against the community effort in an administrative role. A very minor issue that he chose to turn into a hissy internet war about ruining his chances at SysOp and playing it up as though I was trying to control the way he thinks. Then all his friends jump on board and I suddenly look like the bad guy because half of them can't understand a word I'm saying and the other half have such a volatile temper on the internet that even the gentlest of sarcastic remarks against them turns them all into a rabid, hundred-man coalition of angry rebels trying to overthrow the system all in the name of human rights and patriotic free speech. Please, concentrate this energy on improving the wiki, or arguing somewhere else, whatever--just stop the warmongering and continued vilification of what I do here. I know how much it would fire you up to get banned for this and it would be fun to watch your army of freedom fighters march demandingly up to SmashWiki administration with a copy of the constitution in hand, but just because you say you're stating your opinion and doing nothing wrong doesn't mean it's not harassment when you continue to push an accusatory issue on me that has nothing to do with you. This kind of attitude is deconstructive to the community at large--no more, please. I'd much rather be convinced that you're a worthwhile user to have around than to act on the opposite. --RJM ^Talk 05:36, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Alright alright, cool it Pyro. I was never getting mad. We understand what you're saying. All talk on one page. We heard, we just chose to respectfully disagree. On the forums, we talk on one page, on character pages, we talk on one page. Why does every user have a talk page if we are supposed to talk on one? As you previously said, each to his own, and on talk pages, we just find it easier to go to and fro. You don't, we get that. So when we talk to you, we talk on your pgae, as you prefer, when we talk to eachother, we go to and fro, as we prefer. When it comes to important issues, we will not talk in such a haphazard fashion. As it does not concern you really, as you said, I see no need for you to comment on how we do stuff. We're not getting fired up, well, i'm not. Do I sound(look) angry? Just accept that everyone has their own preferences, and when it comes to something that does not negatively affect anyone, keep out of it. No other Sysop had an issue. Clarinet Hawk has never had an issue with it, so why do you? Since clearly, neither of us is going to give up, let's just agree, to diasgree. Ike6481 (talk) 19:54, 22 June 2008 (UTC) Ps: I do like your imagery.

Don't make an attempt to pass this off as though you're winning this argument by trying to claim that you're not the one getting worked up about it when you've just littered my wall with all kinds of sarcastic commentary about elitist SysOp power and blanketing the entire thing with return accusations that I'm the one "getting mad" when from the very beginning, I have asserted that I am not attacking anyone and intervened only in the interest of educating a potential SysOp (and hopefully other members of the community as well) as to the common practice of using the talk pages in a more communal and constructive manner. However, no matter how many times I have tried to explain this, I am still met with more sarcasm and more coy remarks like "cool it Pyro" from people who have nothing to do with the original issue. And THAT is what pisses me off--don't confuse my rebuttals and the aggression behind them with the original issue. How about instead of agreeing to disagree, you agree to take your own advice and keep out of issues that you have nothing to do with instead of coming on here and telling me how to do my job as though you know what does and does not negatively affect a wiki community. We are done here, understand? Good. --RJM ^Talk 23:05, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Alright alright. I apologise. My cool it Pyro remark was just because I was watching the Xmen. And the only reason I'm on your talk pahe is because you don't like fragments. However, I am sorry, and in future I will not be as sarcastic, and nor will I get confused oer your points. Sorry. Ike6481 (talk) 23:11, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Threats/Friends-For-Hire/General Incoherence

Rubs temple with fingers* ehhh... I have a short temper. If you would like to know how short ask Ike. I am TRYING to keep it under control, but I don't deal with ahem *people that annoy me* that well. SO WHAT I AM GOING TO DO is tell you to mind your convorsation with galaxiaD & whoever else you have been pissing off, and NOT to get me angry. OH AND BY THE WAY, I DON'T RECALL IKE or GALAXIAD BEING BANNED. This is why I DO NOT LIKE 1/2 THE ADMIN ON THIS SITE. BECAUSE THEY THINK THEY ARE HIGH & MIGHTY, AND BECOME INCREDIBLY STUCK UP, FOR SOME EVEN MORE SO THEN ME. Kperfekt722 (talk) 23:47, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Kperfeck he has been annoying me as well. Zmario (talk) 23:50, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Who are you, what is your bearing on the situation and what do you hope to accomplish by making a general statement about admins being stuck up and threatening me to "NOT" get you angry? Please try to use less capital letters--it doesn't help convince me that there is either passion or logic behind your words. I'll give you a chance to re-phrase all of that and help you if I can, but if you're just coming here to defend your buddies, I don't think this is the place to be. --RJM ^Talk 00:04, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

RJM just leave us along and we will leave you alone. This bickering will not stop otherwise. When the little guy tries to stand up to the bigger guy the little guy always loses. Thi page is way to long to continue the bantering. Thats another good reason we switch talk pages there is to much kilobyte memeory and causes computers to slow down. Zmario (talk) 23:56, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Well I did stay out of this until you left a... Wait for it... STUCK UP (i know how much you love capitals) comment on my page. In anycase, it appears the person that you decided to cause trouble with in the first place (galaxiaD) has decided not to stoop to your level. I on the other hand, am one of those people who does not take kindly to having people put that CRAP on my talk/user pages. oh and the way you have been talking to my "buddies" doesn't bother me as much as the way you talk in that upper class tone. deal with it. your not going to get anywhere by insulting me and/or my "BUDDIES" (capitals again, just for you) Kperfekt722 (talk) 00:11, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Unwanted commentary is the price of fragmenting conversations across multiple talk pages, I suppose. But as Charitwo pointed out below, you're asking for administrative action by coming out of nowhere and immediately launching an attack against me with respect to a situation that you have no involvement in. Strike two. --RJM ^Talk 00:19, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

I'll say this, if this argument continues, there will be harassment blocks, and they will be long. And that goes for both of you, stop harassing Randall. --Charitwo 00:08, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Just to prove that we're serious about this not continuing, I hit Kperfeck with a 10 min. warning ban, since he thought it was a good idea to post some comments here two min. after Charitwo told them to stop. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 00:22, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Am I in trouble? Or are you just referring to Zmario and Kperfekt, I think i've refrained from anything personal Ike6481 (talk) 00:24, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Furthermore, it is not any way for RfA nominee's to be acting to begin with. --Charitwo 00:25, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleting Bomb Barrier

Ok this is probably a question that stems solely from my inexperience but why would the Bomb Barrier article be deleted for using a personal nickname if no official name exists? That was the name used by the person who developed the technique, so isn't that the official name? Sorry if this is a noobish question. Shade487z (talk) 22:17, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Well, for starters the technique was "developed" by the actual game developers, they just never published a name or perhaps never gave it one in the first place. However, I didn't actually delete the article because it was a personal nickname for the technique (that's just why it was tagged for deletion). The thing is, for a personal nickname of a technique to warrant a SmashWiki article of its own, that terminology has to be widely used throughout the smash community. The term has to be recognized as one of (if not the only) way to describe the technique you're describing.

The best example is the wavedash article. The word "wavedash" caught on back in 2002 when it was originally discovered by a smasher known as Toadbanjoconker. This was right around the time when SmashBoards was slowly turning into the best online community to go to for smash information and the community began to use the boards as a resource to discover more about the game. With players from all over the world working together to unlock the mysteries hidden beneath the physics engine, more and more techniques that they didn't have names for were discovered and so the players named them themselves. Even the word tech was a product of the community and wasn't officially named until Brawl began posting its DOJO updates.

In the intervening years, SmashBoards became easily the largest Smash Bros. community on the internet and became the home of over 60,000 smashers from all over the world. They all came to the same place to learn the same things that those original core members were working to discover and give names to. That's why a wavedash is called a "wavedash" and no matter where you go in the entire world, that's what it's still called. The terminology really has to catch on in the community for it to warrant an article with that title. SmashWiki is supposed to be an easy way to find all that information that is now buried deep within forum posts on SmashBoards and other areas of the internet, so if someone new to smash hear's a term like "double shine" being used at a tournament, they should be able to come here, type it into the search bar and learn what it is everyone was talking about.

The reason that doesn't apply to "bomb barrier" is because it just isn't a frequently-used term. It might be used in a local area and maybe some smashers might have picked up on it, but just because someone posts claiming to discover the technique and gives it a name of its own doesn't make it the official name. Official names are either dictated by Nintendo, or by widespread popular usage. Who knows, maybe "bomb barrier" refers to some sort of Samus technique in Europe--but we don't know for sure because neither definition is popular enough to be recognized amongst the national or international smash community.

Besides, all that bomb-dropping, bomb-laying goodness was covered a long time ago in Melee and is well-documented under various names of its own by NJ'zFinest in Bombs Away! ~ A Guide on Young Link's Bombs.

All that said, I still think that the technique (but not the name) deserves to be mentioned on Toon Link's page under the "Strategies & Tips" section, so I would recommend adding that information to the character page instead of creating an article for it anyway. Besides, if someone wants to look for more information on what you can do with Toon Link, they're going to search for "Toon Link" not "bomb barrier," right? :^) --RJM ^Talk 23:31, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

ooooooooh I got ya. Ok thanks for clearing that up. I was actually considering just putting it under Toon Link's strategies and tips, but I guess now it's the only option. On that note, what about my Double wielding article? Just want to make sure that everything there is ok, as well. Shade487z (talk) 00:57, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

That should be deleted as well. There's nothing notable about trying to use two controllers at the same time. I will say that you do write articles very well, though. Your knowledge of the correct formatting and proper categorization is great and should be spent on more relevant information. --RJM ^Talk 06:03, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Well, all the stuff I did while on the yearbook staff at my school helped. Thanks. Shade487z (talk) 15:04, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Goomba Mafia

Uh, I know it's not really a crew, but I don't really to see them upset if it gets deleted, can it be turned into an online clan or something? (Wolf O'Donnell (talk · contributions) 02:03, 26 June 2008 (UTC))

You turn it into whatever you like, except an article. :^) Online clans don't get articles either--though I'm sure there's still a few kickin' around that haven't jumped out at me enough to purge quite yet. --RJM ^Talk 04:53, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Uh, yeah.. There are acouple, I've come across them. (Wolf O'Donnell (talk · contributions) 06:34, 26 June 2008 (UTC))

Online Moguls and the Goomba Mafia

I understand your desire to keep this site free of unnecessary articles, but was it really necessary to delete the articles about the online crews of the users on this wiki. The ability of online play has made it possible for these users to play regularly and communicate about Smash Bros. While the definition of crews that you gave worked well for Melee, now that users need not live near each other to play regularly, why must they live in close proximity to be a crew. They meet all the other definitions of being a crew. The do play regularly, they are a close group of friends, and they even post videos of their matches. Again, I understand that you want to keep this site free of random pages about nothing, but these are some of the most active users, even if they can get out of hand at times. What harm can truly come from allowing them to publicize their crew? Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 01:30, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

It's about article notability. This should be a wiki free of spam and full of legitimate smash information. Even the crew article needs revising, because a crew that doesn't compete is nothing more than a bunch of friends that smash together and have given themselves a name but otherwise have no impact on the community at large. If the article doesn't tell you anything about smash or the smash community, there's no reason for it to be publicized. I give an awful lot of time, effort, travel mileage and money into making the competitive community a legitimate sporting following and to have groups of hot-tempered, attention-seeking teenagers creating abstract "crews" and "joining" up to ten of them at a time is a bastardization of the efforts of smashers whose allied tournament play makes a real impact on the history of smash at large. Crew members have never needed to live in close proximity in order to compete as a crew, but they'd better turn up at a tournament and better have some idea of what a crew battle is if they're going to try and lump themselves in the same category as the real crews. I recognize that a good number of people around here have very little concept of the widespread influence of competitive smash since the merge with Wikia, but don't let their angry tirades get the best of you. We are trying to make an encyclopedia here (at least I assume we share that objective) and it's important to bear in mind that there's plenty of garbage on the internet that doesn't cause any harm, but that doesn't mean it isn't garbage. --RJM ^Talk 03:11, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Alright, that's a good point. I hope I didn't make you think that I don't value your opinion. I know we may not see eye to eye on every policy on this wiki, but I do think that you are a great editor and have it's best interests at heart. I look forward to working with you to continue taking it in the right direction. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 17:46, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Is this spam?

There was a State Locator page containing the typical info of a smashboards Locator thread, but more organized. This was marked for Speedy Deletion with the reason given Spam/Advertisement, which a sysop did delete claiming that the Locator page was spam. Is this the correct policy?

I've always thought of spam to be something like a page full of gibberish, or an unwanted email. Not a page with useful information. So was it spam? Here's where the page used to be, and here's my discussion with the deleting sysop. If that is spam then the Speedy Deletion Policy page needs to reflect this.

On a side note, is there a central place that links to all this wiki's policies? It's tedious searching for the right way to do things here. Ryzol (talk) 15:07, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Well, she's right to delete it from this wiki because something like a "locator" is much better suited to an interactive forum community rather than an encyclopedia which is really just a one-way street for information. More often than not, there should be external links to locator pages, tournament thread discussions, etc. as cited references within an article, but for an article to have place here, it has to have ties to a smash community elsewhere that helps fuel the community at large. We certainly don't disapprove of starting pages like that--rather, we just know that there is better and more effective places to do so than SmashWiki.

You make a valid point about the lack of policies, though. SmashWiki was merged with the Super Smash Bros. Wikia awhile back and it created a very unusual mixture of content and clash in existing policies. It has yet to be resolved but there is now a push to get things going in terms of sorting out the administrative framework. I apologize that no concrete list of policies is available at this point and sympathize with your frustration. --RJM ^Talk 12:41, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Broken

It just may be a regional thing, but "broken" is a pretty common Smash term where I play. I'd say it's even more common than "No Jonhs" or "Sandbagging." If it's just my area, I can understand why you deleted it, so I thought I'd ask about that. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 20:53, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Reconsider

Look man, I know you don't care much for Kperfekt or myself, but we're only "bashing" you because of the stress you've been causing for us. You called us degenerates and basically deleted our crew page for no reason. If someone did this to you, wouldn't you be ticked? Also, calling us hot-headed, attention-seeking teenagers was a little uncalled for. Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't those personal attacks as well? If Kperfekt and I get banned for personally attacking you, then it's only fair that YOU get banned as well for personally attacking us. I just want you to leave us alone. We, in turn, will leave YOU alone. I just want this to be over. I just want us to move on. Do you want an apology? Fine. Kperfekt and I are sorry for disrespecting you. I respect your intentions for this site, as well as your intentions to lead the wiki in the right direction. I know you mean nothing but good for this site, but some things you do just aren't agreeable to other people. I again apologize, and I hope you find it in your heart to forgive me and my friends. - GalaxiaD (talk) 22:31, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Honestly, you guys should take your club to a personal website, or possibly to Smash Boards PMs, unless you plan to actually contribute to the encyclopedia. Even then, you should reduce the amount of myspacing you're doing.

This, I'm sure, is part of Randall's frustration; you seem to think this place is MySpace. It is not. Either you need to help fix the things wrong with it, or you can/should go. I hate to ban/block non-vandals, but am willing to take the same steps Randall is considering. --Sky (t · c · w) 03:01, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

IP adress

There is an IP adress user that has vandalized the Mr.G&W twice. I have reverted the edits but I have a feeling this person needs to be blocked or warned.--Oxico (talk) 17:45, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Hello

I just wanted to archive your talk page. It was getting very cluttered. Zmario (talk) 17:48, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Please don't do that again. --RJM ^Talk 21:51, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

First, Randall's right: Don't mess with users talk pages unless they ask you to.

I have to say, however, Randall that this page is getting pretty long. I've got a broadband connection (and have used T1) and still have longer load times on this page than most others. And there are people with dial-up that could have some major problems loading this page. It's your talk page, so it's completely up to you whatever you do. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 21:58, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, it wouldn't be an issue if it weren't for the Wikia garbage that has to load with it now. A plain text page on the old server could've gone three times as long without any issues. It's part of my continued quiet rebellion against the executive decision, that's all. It's still considerably smaller than List of SSBM Trophies and just twice the size of The Subspace Emissary, all without images. I will trim it down once the oldest of the conversations die out, but until then, I expect most people will be able to put up with it. --RJM ^Talk 22:24, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Vandalisim

There is a lot of it in in the Mr. Game & Watch SSBB page in the Trivia section. I cleaned some of it, but there is just so much...Amycats2 (talk) 18:50, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Yeah someone has been having a hater streak against Mr.G&W. Can you PLEASE block him/her? They are IP adress 66.30.184.164. --Oxico (talk) 18:55, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

I had to revert 2 edits from that page. Zmario (talk) 19:19, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

I took care of it. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 19:37, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

The month-long protection is probably a good length. I don't like to have to protect character pages since they attract so much attention and often are worthwhile recipients of anonymous editors, but that should be enough to keep the vandals out of the pot for a bit. Or at least give him enough time to make an account that we can ban properly if he's that passionate about hating on 2-D chaps like my buddy Game & Watch. --RJM ^Talk 21:51, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't like having to protect them either, but things can get out of hand when we just let any random IP put stuff on them. For example, someone kept adding under Sonic's pros that "His back throw can kill the opponent at above 300%." And we get a lot of people that have just removed legit cons from the section because, as they say, s/he's my main, how could s/he have so many cons. It's really unfortunate that we have to protect so many character pages, but I really don't see a way around it. I will keep an eye on Mr. G & W and any account that vandalizes it will be shown no mercy. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 22:04, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Not COol

I have Windows Vista -.-. The least you could of done was thank me for atleast TRYING to help you. Noooooooo........Archiving is for people who has adial up connection. Puh-lease. Zmario (talk) 21:57, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

You've done nothing but make more work for me since the day you came on to this wiki. Take your attitude elsewhere, please. Thank you. --RJM ^Talk 22:16, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Why Thank you. Your comment has been noted and will be ignored. Thank you for purchasing the Bad Comment Sniffer 3.0. Zmario (talk) 22:20, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Er, I'm gonna have to agree with Randall here. Mainly because it is his talk page. Also, you're chasing an issue that needs not be chased. And lastly, I was reading through our argument, was I a dickhead! Yes. Please, don't argue. Ike6481 (talk) 22:25, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Delete Template

I know that we both made some changes to the delete template in the past week. However, articles that are marked for deletion no longer appear in the category:Candidates for Deletion, even though each of their pages' still says that they are in that category. I know, and agree, that we should do the discussion on the talk page, but it is near impossible to even find the pages marked for deletion if they are not added to a list in a category. Do you know what happened to the template to prevent it from adding the pages to the category? Or is is a problem in the category? Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 14:04, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

It was a technical conflict between the <includeonly> tags and the [[Category:]] versus [[:Category:]]-style links. Should be fixed now! *thumbs up* --RJM ^Talk 17:04, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, the pages are being added to the category again, but now the whole template page is being added, including the all the code text. I took a look at the source, and all the <includeonly> and <noinclude> codes looked to be right. I'm not great with templates myself, but I'll take another look and see if I can fix it. Could you check it also, however, to make sure I don't screw things up. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 17:57, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

That's very strange, it worked fine when I changed it and now that a few other changes have been made it seems to be working still. I wonder if it's related to how different internet browsers handle the source code. I know that has caused some issues in the past. Let me know if there's any other problems--I'm just not seeing any. --RJM ^Talk 20:01, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm really not sure what caused it, but I talked to Sky and he took care of it. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 21:51, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Crew Namespace

It think it's time that we close that discussion. You, Sky, and I are opposed, and Erik is somewhat opposed. The other sysops haven't weighed in, but I think there's more than enough of a administrators' consensus there already. I'll let Charitwo and Rita know that we're looking into ending it in case they have any huge objections, but it doesn't look like it's going anywhere and we could use the community discussion on much better topics. What do you think? Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 15:29, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

New Brawl

I see the Post-Merge Cleanup page has something on everything that belongs on a character page...somethings have been taken out, like the Special Movements sections I worked so hard to put on the pages. Can those be kept?--Oxico (talk) 00:58, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Link me to specific articles or else I'm not sure what you're referring to. There's thousands. --RJM ^Talk 23:23, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Here are some, just to name a few: Bowser's, Jiggly's, Snake's, etc. The section is on every Brawl character's page.--Oxico (talk) 13:51, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Ahh, like the victory poses and all that, gotcha. Yeah, I could tell that a lot of effort went into those and expected some sort of comment about it. While I think the information that you captured was valuable, I guess I was just looking for a way to "reduce" the amount of trivial information that appeared as a major header so there's no question as to what is and is not useful to the widest audience. The thing is, there's already articles for fanfare and victory pose and on-screen appearances. Those little pieces of information are better compiled into a page about that feature of the game instead of cluttering up the fighter info pages. And since most of it is already captured elsewhere on the wiki, all that was really left from your sections was the "Wii Remote Choice" and credits music. By themselves, those two are even less likely to justify a section of their own on a fighter page. However, I would encourage you to include the quirkiest information in the Trivia section of certain articles. (i.e. "* If you beat Subspace Emissary with Sheik, Young Jeezy's dirty-south hip hop track "Gangsta Music" will play behind the credits.") --RJM ^Talk 02:41, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

OK I can live with that. LOL nice one with the example. Well, so long as there are movesets for me to do intimate and deep research into on the character pages I am happy :P --Oxico (talk) 12:25, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Wait wait wait where will the credits musicm wii remote choice and Idle Stance be put? They don't really attribute to gameplay but quite frankly even Idle Stance affects gameplay more than "Victory Pose".--Oxico (talk) 12:33, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Proboards

Why did you come onto my Proboards just to start trouble? Seriously, I did nothing to deserve your presence. - GalaxiaD (talk) 02:22, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

I do not take kindly to people posting things under my name; it's a mild form of identity theft. Remove that user from your message board and don't come on here pretending I'm the bad guy for defending myself. We are working on this wiki now and I'm tired of the crap continuously being brought up by you and your army of talk page adversaries who have done next to nothing to help the project and nearly everything to slow it down with petty and childish internet drama. I can't make myself any clearer than that. We're done here. --RJM ^Talk 13:20, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

LOL, I should've expected a response like that. Typical you. THAT is why my friend is going by your name. You're far too predictable. Not to mention that you have a very short fuse. Whatever, keep complaining about our convos all you want. And please, have fun with your boring little project. Meanwhile, me and my friends will be getting outside to see the world in all its beauty. Have a nice day! - GalaxiaD (talk) 17:16, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Galaxia, now is a good time to shut up and drop this thing. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 18:14, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Honestly, I would consider "identity theft" of any sort as a blockable offense, even if it occurs off-wiki. --Sky (t · c · w) 21:49, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Don't have to tell me twice. --RJM ^Talk 00:03, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Er, I really don't see the harm just calling one of them Randall is doing. If, they were doing this on-wiki, then sure, block. But off-wiki, how far did they go to make it blockable there? Ike6481 (talk) 14:43, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Weights

First of all, thanks for adding the weights back in. Second, do you know how the numbers are calculated for the melee weights? I've been looking into finding some way to calculate the weights for SSB and Brawl and then get them all standardized. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 02:17, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

The original Melee list comes from a horizontal knockback test on Mushroom Kingdom II, side-smashing with Mario (I believe) at every damage percent starting from 1% until the character is KO'd. Don't quote me on this, but I'm pretty sure the stage was used because you can hit with a f-smash on any character directly after landing off the stage entry platforms, which validates the data as you do not have to account for errors caused by accidental horizontal movement on the analog.

I haven't done a lot of digging for this kind of data myself either and a lot of what I've learned has just been accepted as truth for so many years that it's hard to justify it so long after the research was made public knowledge. Mew2King's famous frame data page has an incredible amount of information gathered by collecting these kinds of back-end stats for a lot of games, so that might give you some insight into the methods used. Beyond that, The Official Everything Thread is a wicked resource with a lot of great links and some knowledgeable people who probably have a foothold on collecting the new Brawl data as well. Hope that helps! If you dig up anything juicy, lemme know. :^) --RJM ^Talk 02:32, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Problem

I think that there is something wrong with the welcome template. --Posted by Pikamander2 (Talk) at 02:36, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

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.

Recent changes is a great first stop, because you can see what other people are editing right this minute, and where you can help.

Please sign in, if you haven't already, and create a user name! It's free, and it'll help you keep track of all your edits. See Help:Why create an account for more info on creating an account.

Questions? You can ask at the Help desk or on the "discussion" page associated with each article, or post a message on [[User talk:{{{1}}}|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!

{{{2}}}

ASSHOLE!!!

YOU FUCKING HEARTLESS, DEMONIC BASTARD. I hope you are incenerated in the place you came from.

Fuck you,

--Blue Ninjakoopa (talk) 03:04, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

We need to talk

OK, there's a lot of stuff going on with the petty internet drama. I know that you have much better things to do with your time than worry about it, as do I, but I think that we have a certain responsibility as sysops to settle it. However, I don't want these discussions being flooded with the ideas of other users. If you could e-mail me at aaron-kirschner@uiowa.edu with any ideas you have about this, I will e-mail you my thoughts. I won't be able to get back to you until tonight on account of me driving from Boston to Pittsburgh, but I will respond as soon as I can. Thank you. 03:33, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Apology

Regarding the striking out his little lines of text. I assumed you didn't want them to be completely visible. You have my apology. (Wolf O'Donnell (talk · contributions) 07:09, 14 August 2008 (UTC))

Haha, no need to apologize. :^) --RJM ^Talk 07:10, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Why did you block Kperfekt and Galxia and BlueNinjaKoopa. Who are you gongi to ban next, ME? You better hope not. Zmario (talk) 09:57, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Zmario, you are not helping.

Randall, I'm afraid I have no idea what just happened with these recent perma-bans. I know one person was posing as another (always a perma-ban, no exceptions), and three others told you to "f*ck off" and flooded you with hate mail. I don't know all the details, but it seems your punishment was pretty harsh. (Not that I'm saying they didn't deserve bans for what they did, I just think it was to much.) They're just kids with keyboards, of course they're going to do dumb things, bitch at people, and throw foul language around. If it was full-blown hate messages, I would understand a ban of a few months. What did they do to earn themselves perma-bans? FyreNWater - (Talk • Contributions ) 01:44, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure if it changes anything, but the impersonation seems to have happened on a different site (where, exactly, I'm not sure).–Entrea Sumatae 02:12, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

The question people need to stop asking is "why can't these kids come on to SmashWiki and do whatever they want?" And the question we need to start asking is "what was their membership actually worth"? The fact is, they contributed nothing to the project and did nothing but get in the way of a constructive environment. Sure, I could've banned them for a few months or maybe a couple weeks, but what's the difference? They learn nothing by getting temporarily blocked AND they learn nothing by getting permanently blocked. At least with the latter, we don't have to deal with it anymore.

Honestly, what did we gain by having these members around? I can't think of anything. Or at least nothing that even remotely comes close to a fair deal when you consider the amount of time they wasted in the process. It's not surprising to me that it seems a little harsh to the softened-up internet that's emerged over the last few years and it's cool if other administrators disagree, but I'm telling you, it's in the best interest of the project. Somebody has to stand up against this kind of trash and I'm not afraid to make "enemies" in the process, because I know that true enmity doesn't exist on the internet and that I'm actually a pretty okay guy. This website is still a community-written encyclopedia--a project with many workers. So don't think about this in terms of firing one of the workers forever; it's more like turning down his job application in the first place based on low qualifications...yet he keeps coming back to hang around the job site for days after the interview. --RJM ^Talk 16:23, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

While I strongly agree about them not contributing and, much of the time, pushing things backwards and wasting people's time... you know, I forgot my argument. I think it was something like "they have the right to come and help" or something, but it just disappeared when I just realized that a person I'm trying to help basically called me a "f*g" and told me to "GTFO". Whatever the higher-ups think, I guess. Frankly, I'm sick of trying to help them and getting cussed at in the process. FyreNWater - (Talk • Contributions ) 01:30, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

User:Shadowcrest/policy

As a sysop, I expect you to be interested in benefitting the community- and I wholeheartedly believe that the implementation of all of the proposed policies/other administration-related things listed on that page would benefit the wiki. It would be greatly appreciated if you would point out any issues you have with any of the things listed on that page, and whether or not you think any or all of them should be implemented, and if not, why not.

Of course, I realize you have a life and other things to attend to- I don't expect this to be completed overnight ;)

Whenever you get the chance, it would be great if you would comment on them.

Thanks, --Shadowcrest 01:58, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

PS: Your talk page is 110KB long. Need moar archives :P --Shadowcrest 01:58, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Looks good, dude! We can definitely use the bulk of that. The "you are valuable" policy is a little too fluffy and lovey-dovey for my taste as I think it miscommunicates the idea that you're valuable no matter what--which just isn't the case, especially in light of recent events. If banned users were valuable, they wouldn't have gotten banned. So yeah, personally I'd cut that policy right out of the package, but I expect to be voted out on that one and I'll settle for some severe editing. :^) And you know, it might not hurt to turn this whole implementation phase into a project page. --RJM ^Talk 17:09, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Everyone on this wiki needs moar archives. I think they just don't happen here.–Entrea Sumatae 02:00, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Yes I'm aware of the length of my talk page; I just haven't had the time to go through it because I've been babysitting users since the turn of the century it seems. Might get around to that archiving today. --RJM ^Talk 17:11, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Umm

Will I get banned because I undid and edit from a sysop? ive been told not to erase any comments from a talk page so im sticking by that! Zmario (talk) 00:19, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

I am also sorry for any misunderstandings we may have caused in the past and I want to start over with you. you can still hate my guts, but Im goign to be nice to you from now on. Lets become friends...... Zmario (talk) 00:23, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Too late. Goodbye. E-mail me with your case and I may reconsider: randall00@proimpact.ca --RJM ^Talk 00:25, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Edit warring on SmashWiki:Requests for adminship and general incivility

Please stop repeatedly reverting the RFA page. Use the talk page to discuss changes to the page. As far as "How many discussions we need to have", we haven't really had any. Restricting the RFA process is abuse of your power as a sysop and continuing to do it may result in your adminship being removed and you being given a temporary block. In addition, your attitude towards other editors such as your overuse of CAPS LOCK and general rudeness is disruptive towards this wiki and will be treated accordingly if it is not reversed. Dtm142 (talk) 00:26, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Whoa! Buddy, are you threatening me?? There's like four pages of discussion on that very issue! And forgive my "incivility" but have you seen what's been going on around here? It would be hilariously appropriate to the degeneration of this wiki over time to have me banned for banning users for abusing other users, but go hard if you want, I guess?? --RJM ^Talk 00:32, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Dtm, I think you are much more guilty of "abusing your power as an admin" than Randall is. How about all the moves of Tournament, tier list, etc. to the Smasher namespace simply because you can't get your head around the fact that there is a strong competitive scene that you're not a part of? Or showing up after months of inactivity and overruling a decision reached by five active sysops? Randall has been doing his damnedest to improve this wiki, so if he gets a little testy about people that he feels undermines the wiki I think he's earned the right to do so. If you had actually read any of the discussions about this (or any of the other pages I mentioned) you would realize that their is reason for the nominations to be closed. Don't accuse other people of abusing their power when you're the one who disappears for months at a time, then resurfaces to try and remove any mention of the competitive scene of Smash Bros. and just decides to overturn the decision of the sysops who had been working during your vacation. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 01:18, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

That is not a fair assessment. The competitive side of Smash Bros is the reason for the Smasher namespace in the first place. I'm not saying the moves went in the right place, but the mainspace wasn't completely appropriate either. Perhaps a second wiki, which I believe was proposed before and dedicated entirely to the competitive side of this game (but not content game content like playable characters, moves, etc) may be more appropriate. --Charitwo^Talk 01:50, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

There was no general agreement (AKA consensus) to close all RFAs. Yes a few editors agreed, but five people (even if they are administrators) do not speak for the entire community. As for the blocks, I am unsure about the whole issue. You have blocked one of them for abusive sockpuppetry, and I am tempted to agree with you. It seems far too convenient that they are all there at the same time. A checkuser by a staff member was a good idea, but it seems that they are completely different people. However, two wrongs don't make a right.

With respect to my moves of Tournament and Tier list, I was just trying to improve the wiki by acting according to the forum thread. The Smasher namespace was created for that reason (competitive game articles). I only moved each one once, and adminship has nothing to do with being able to move pages. Clarinet Hawk, why are you insulting me for my opinions? I have every right to participate in community discussions about what is acceptable content on this wiki. This discussion isn't about whether those articles should be allowed in the main namespace, it is about the edit wars. Regarding my inactivity, I am sorry that I have a life. If all editors are expected to be free of other commitments including work, school, and other wikis then I probably deserve to be banned. I apologize for the inconvenience I have caused. Dtm142 (talk) 01:57, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

This is why the merge was resisted by Randall in the first place. Anyway, how can you claim that the competitive side is unimportant. Most people that enjoy baseball aren't pros and probably aren't bothered by the infield fly or balk rules in their casual games. Would that mean that those rules shouldn't be included in a baseball wiki? Of course not. In any game, the top competitive players are the ones who make the game. I'm not saying that a casual following is not critical, but the top players and techniques are inherently critical. As another example, look at the guitar hero wiki. Most average players don't elbow strum or tap, but there are pages on the techniques because that's what the top players use.

Also, I understand that you have things to do besides this wiki. However, I think that it is a fair for me to feel slightly put off by the fact that you have been absent and the first thing you do after coming back is to overrule everybody. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 02:01, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

He never said it wasn't important, just that it might be more appropriate elsewhere. --Charitwo^Talk 02:04, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Exactly. Take the RuneScape wiki projects for example. Now RuneScape is an MMORPG, played together by thousands of people at any given time. However, the main RuneScape wiki does not allow articles about individual players and clans. Does this mean that the game's players aren't important? Of course it doesn't. As you said on the forums once, the most important part of a game is its players. However, they clearly do not belong in an encyclopedia that is about the game's content. Instead, we have sister projects such as Fan fiction and Clans that are dedicated to fan material and player made clans, respectively. However, as I mentioned earlier this talk page is not a forum for discussing this type of content. It is about the recent edit wars. Dtm142 (talk) 02:28, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

If you want to start-up a new wiki, be my guest. But you said yourself that we all have other lives. I really can't trouble myself to be involved with another wiki. And there's a big difference between fan-fiction and professional tournaments, tactics, and mindsets. You're trying to contend that we should focus only on what Sakuri intended Smash Bros. to do. However, this defeats the entire point of a game. Each person and the community as a whole should strive to advance the metagame to the highest level possible. Would you suggest that wavedash should be moved to the Smasher namespace and/or removed from the wiki? Under your criteria, it should as it is not an intended consequence or technique of the game that is used primarily by competitors in tournaments that are not sanctioned by Nintendo. How about recovery? It's something that must be mastered for competitive play, but also exists in casual play. To say that competitive game articles should be removed from the main namespace is extremely close to removing everything from the main namespace. By nature, a game is competitive; otherwise it wouldn't be a game. The Smasher namespace is for people who play Smash, not anything relating to competition. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 04:58, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

That is why we have a separate wiki for clans that is independent to the fan fiction wiki - they are not endorsed or supported by Jagex (the creators of RuneScape), but they are important to the community as a whole. However, they do not exist alongside game content articles in the main wiki. Articles about advanced moves are a grey area, but I think that they could be placed on this wiki in the main namespace because they benefit players of all levels and not just an internet community. We should try to keep the main namespace NPOV and remember that the community exists for the encyclopedia, not the other way around. Dtm142 (talk) 18:40, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Sockpuppet enquiry

Due to an inquiry by Charitwo, this is a quick note to mention that Zmario and Cafinator have nothing to do with each other, and neither have sockpuppeteered in any records we have. Kirkburn (talk) 01:00, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

It's not Zmario, but it doesn't really matter which one of them it is. Neither have done anything to warrant a welcoming hand here. --RJM ^Talk 01:04, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

I don't want to get involved in the wiki disputes, but I just wanted to clarify neither can be accused of abusing multiple accounts. They are innocent of that charge. Kirkburn (talk) 02:19, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Unrelated to that^^^But as you may have realised...I have been away and was never on Proboards, I am sorry to ask, cos we don't get on.....the best, but what exactly happened with Galaxia, Kperfekt and the other guy....BlueNinjaKoopa? And as for helping them out....I am sorry for all the incoherence I have caused you when all you were doing is trying to improve this Wiki. And I do see your frustration with us, as I have argued with GalaxiaD and Kperfekt, they are annoying arguers who doom you to hell and swear rather than say anything related. Just like I do my annoying analogies and you get everything technically right. Anyway, as for why they should be unblocked...I'm almost certain they'll be too proud to send you an email. They are both (I don't realy care bout the other guy) highly active users who do their best to contribute to and improve upon this Wiki. While, the vast majority of the time, they fail, their 'hearts' or cyberhearts are in the right place. As for the impersonating.....which is the exent of my knowledge on the subject....I think it was just a joke that got out of hand....And, it was between them on their own little board, so really, they all knew it was whoever it was impersonating you, if I said that right. Obviously, I can see why you are upset...But it seems a little like to me that you might be making a mountain out of a molehill. And come on, look at their overly long, hugely pathetic goodbyes, they clearlyare a little OBSESSED with this Wiki, and well, they are (Especially Galaxia) probably crying at home. That is all I can say at this moment in time with my limited knowledge of the matter. Ike6481 (talk) 12:31, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Wow nice going. Siding with the enemy. RANDALL! I DEMAND the ban lift of BlueNinjaKoopa, GalaxiaD, and Kperfekt. They should have been let off with a warnign before you have maliciosuly banned them for an infinite time. They did nothign wrong. GalaxiaD and Kperfekt did ABSOLUETLY nothing wrong. Galaxia has not said one bad word on this wikia and all of the events has happened on a different site which should have NO reprucussions on this site. BlueNinjaKopa was just speaking his mind out which should have only led to a warning but yet you decid to just go off and permently ban people. As for me and Cafinator WE DID NOT DO ANYTHING WORNG and we are NOT the same people so I demand an apology. When you are willing to come out of concave hole feel free to let me know. Zmario (talk) 00:22, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Read what I put properly Zmario then calm down and think about what you are doing. Your rude and unintelligent behaviour is of use to no-one. I do agree that Galaxia should not have got banned, but as for BNK, I think he full well deserved it. Think clearly before you insult the person you are trying to appeal to. You don't hear in Lawyers in court going "F***ing jurors, he's bloody innocent you scumwillies" Just calm down. Ike6481 (talk) 13:13, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Zmario

I think Zmario needs a temprorary ban. He uploaded Image:Retard.jpg and put that on your smasher pageY462 (talk) 00:56, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Explain more

It is clear to me from a cursory glance at this site that there is a failure to communicate. I'm using Randall's quotes because they were easy to find, but the conclusions will apply to all admins.

"All I gotta do is point out that permanent bans don't happen for no reason, therefore they can't possibly be the "start" of anything" sounds like a logical fallacy or a proposition for unconditional determinism until you realize that it means "I didn't set this chain of events in motion, therefore I refuse to take any blame for the outcome." Rephrased like that, the sentiment suddenly becomes understandable and canbe reasonably argued.

Spin it however you like, but I don't read it as an absolvement of blame and, being the one who wrote it, I feel I have a pretty good idea of its original intent. This "re-phrasing" is a shift of emphasis from the blocked user to me and it changes the meaning substantially by making the statement about me, when it was originally about the blocked user. It's pretty clear that you haven't been around for the bulk of this overtly dramatic and needlessly wasteful chain of events, though--that wasn't exactly a choice quote upon which to assert my qualifications as an administrator. It was the end of a coy and sarcastic exchange which only came about after I had been pushed frustratingly far on issues that I had addressed time and time again elsewhere on the wiki. There was a time where I made a concerted effort to provide supporting arguments, links and policy-related quotations in order to justly and fairly block inappropriate users, but this has been going on for months and it costs me more time than I'm willing to invest to have to do this on a continuous basis--especially in a situation where the users in question have been blocked repeatedly had repeated warnings and have proven to have little or no value to the actual wiki's purpose. Other sysops tend to soften up on these issues and revert or shorten my bans thinking that somehow the users will magically return in two weeks to become helpful, rehabilitated editors. Then, the ban expires, they return, they come on to my talk page cursing me to the foulest depths of hell, calling other sysops fucking whores and dropping hate messages into their user pages and on the talk pages of community members. My point stands: Permanent bans do not happen for no reason; I did not set this chain of events into motion--the blocked users did, by undermining the purpose of this wiki to the point that their contributions went from harmless chat/spam to deliberate abuse and hate messages directed at other members of the community. Please try to understand this when assessing the reasoning behind individual blocks on this matter; there's usually a history. --RJM ^Talk 18:35, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

"If banned users were valuable, they wouldn't have gotten banned" sounds like circular reasoning, especially when "being rather unhelpful" is toeing the line to getting banned. What you mean is that you ban people for a reason, the reason being that they make doing good editing work on the wiki more difficult, taking your valuable time; and that continuing to listen to them after the ban actually negates that aim (because, again, that takes time and keeps you from editing).

Now I don't doubt you are a fantastic editor. But being a fantastic admin means you do take the time to explain to people why your admin decisions are going the way they are. You attribute the wiki going downhill to the time after the merge, stating that since then you've been picking up the pieces. Secretly the members of both communities think that the other community is to blame for this.

I'm not exactly sure where that quote came from, but I think it was a response and once again, it's been pulled out of context when paraphrased here. You are right in saying that I have no interest in continuing the paper chase after the block has occurred, but again, I think you're assessing specific blocks that have a much meatier history to them than would be immediately obvious to an outside observer. I will not and have never blocked someone without giving them ample warning, opportunities to redeem themselves and a clear explanation of the ramifications of their actions and how to remedy them in the future. But yes, I'm not going to piss around copying and pasting a bunch of abusive commentary and links to other discussions every time that I have to re-block someone who just comes around every couple of weeks to stir the pot. I didn't come here to ban users and I don't enjoy having to do it just so I can focus on the actual purpose of this wiki. I care about it as a legitimate researchable project and information source--sure, I could let the users who don't contribute anything run wild and free, and I usually do until their interference begins leaking into our actual operations. If you were to trace this back to the very original incident that caused this community-wide waste of time, you'll find that the first backlash came from my suggesting proper talk page conventions to User:GalaxiaD in the interest of fluid discussions across the community that would be easier for everyone to follow. His response was defiant and rude, as though I were attacking him or something. On several occasions, I tried to stress that the issue was not personal and, in fact, it was in his best interest if he were actually interested in being a contributor. However, his defiance (and his history of contributions) made it clear that he didn't spend virtually any time editing actual articles and my diplomatic rebuttal only seemed to fuel the fire and ever since, he has been under the impression that I'm somehow out to get him. This turned into a wide variety of hate-o-grams all over the wiki, as well as GalaxiaD's famous request for adminship (and subsequent suggestions to other users that they apply) that snowballed into a whole pile of unqualified users posting their applications based on GalaxiaD's recommendation! But wait, there's more! Because now some time has passed and we've got strangers popping in left and right with policy suggestions who really only catch one side of the situation (the angry users are always the loudest, but that doesn't make them right), the entire adminship process is in a state of disarray and everyone's talking about a complete overhaul as though there's something wrong with it and the focus of the entire wiki community has shifted from the CONTENT to the POLICY and a bunch of angsty teen internet drama! Well, what good is a policy without the content it produces? If we want to neglect the content and sit around on talk pages for a year and a half trying to come up with bulletproof policy, we don't even know what content the policy is trying to protect! Pardon my digression, but ultimately, my criticism of this entire process has been how unnecessary the associated workload has been in light of the purpose of the wiki. I recognize the need to have policies and parameters in place, but far too much administrative overhead has already been spent on this subject--and I felt that months ago. The more crap that comes up about it, the more the blocked users are winning this fight by causing as much trouble as they possibly can. This is the degeneration of the wiki that I'm talking about: when more effort is spent protecting everyone's right to play around on talk pages than it is on protecting and expanding the content. --RJM ^Talk 18:35, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

In fact, merging two wikis is rather difficult. This is not only a technical feat - which you've accomplished, congrats! -; merging two communities that have historically different customs and views about how a wiki should be run is a diplomatic task not to be taken lightly. I suspect it was.

Regarding the merge: you're probably right to assume that both communities secretly blame each other for the problems that arose from the merge, but no active member of SmashWiki or the Super Smash Bros. Wikia is at fault here. It was an executive decision that was handed down without warning and without consultation from Gideon--nobody here had any part in it and it was actually a huge surprise to log in one day and find such a huge mess. I resisted the merge as soon as it happened and still disagree with it today. I have a long history with Smash World and they have a long history of making bad decisions, so I don't know what else to say about it. If I had the authority to revert the merge, I'd do it in a second. For that reason, I just don't accept blame or responsibility for issues that can be directly attributed to the merge; it wasn't my decision and had I not contributed so much content to the wiki already, I would've left outright. --RJM ^Talk 18:35, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Who here has the ability to actually explain decisions? To argue them? To get community buy-in? This is what all admins should have been spending a big part of their time on - or at least some of them should have. Instead, you're not even warning users, showing them how to act, you just ban them. The only people I've seen actually using warning templates on anons after a cursory examination of the block log are Wolf O'Donnell and GalaxiaD, and they can't ban.

I recommend getting more admins - that frees up some of your time. Wolf O'Donnell might be a good choice, but I haven't looked far - there might be more. I also recommend actually arguing a few controversial decisions until an understanding has been reached. May I also suggest that you not react with bans when people get angry at you; it is usually a sign that they haven't understood you, and it's likely that others haven't, either, so a course of action that solves the problem somewhat long-term must be light on the banning and heavy on the explaining.

Once again, the notion that I don't explain my bans and jump to conclusions based on people simply disagreeing with me is false. However, if a user has been blocked multiple times by multiple admins for multiple reasons, the need to explain the reasoning becomes less significant and the evidence that a longer block will solve more problems than a 2-week ban and an essay explaining why is hard to ignore. --RJM ^Talk 18:35, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

If you do not manage that: to explain the operating standards of the admins and adapting them to the expectations of the community in a compromise process, then your wiki will keep bleeding users and remain to not be a fun place to be. You are in charge. It is your task to facilitate this process. That your editors have come breaking your doors means you've not been doing it. Get going!

Hehe, I would argue that only the "users" have been breaking down my doors, not editors--turns out there's a difference! --RJM ^Talk 18:35, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Disclaimer: I have no stake in this at all - I don't even own the game. But I have stumbled upon this wiki and couldn't help but notice things have gone awry, and I hope that my limited insight into the dynamics of this can be of help to you. Good luck. --84.128.253.16 02:44, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Open Letter: An Outsider Looking In

In the course of writing an open letter in regard to the current state of administrative affairs on this wiki, I referenced you or your actions a number of times, directly or indirectly. As such, I thought I would invite you to respond. Thanks in advance. Defiant Elements 05:12, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

ccsc

I know it's not a smasher, but it is an organization/circuit/whatever made up of them, correct? The association is there, there just isn't a better category. I personally think it's the best choice of categories given the current. I only categorized it, as it was on Special:uncategorizedpages, and I don't like that, as it prevents useful navigation. I'd like to readd the category, of course. --Sky (t · c · w) 16:34, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

It should really be under Category:Communities along with the South German Smash Circuit and Australian Smash Circuit. There's a few others out of the midwest and quite a few that don't have articles yet. I just hadn't created the category due to a lack of articles. One of my many pre-merge plans that got pushed under the rug. But Category:Smashers and the sub-categories beneath them are specifically for players and the category tree is organized regionally for that reason. --RJM ^Talk 16:43, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

I sent it

I sent you your apology. Please note that I am not giving into you, I simply feel sorry for you because you have to deal with people hating you all the time. If you are wondering how I am able to write to you, my IP address has changed (I'm in Alabama now).

--Blue Ninjakoopa 04:40, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Mmm...well, not the smartest thing Cafinator would type...Cafinator (talk) 05:09, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Why did you...

Ban Blue Ninjakoopa? I know he was flaming, but banning him forever is a little harsh. Banning him for infinite isn't gonna make it better. He'll just be angrier. If you banned him until further notice, he would eventually learn as you wouldn't unban him until he started being nicer. And why did you ban all my friends forever? See BN on what to ban him for. Also, you keep saying that I, Kperfekt, Blue, Galaxia, Ike, Zmario, and Amycats have contributed nothing. Believe it or not, we contribute a lot. But what really got me mad is that you deleted the "Goomba Mafia" article. You accused it of "not being a crew" while KP and I really formed that crew. Please note that it is still a crew, just one without its own page. So...yeah. P.S. Sorry if my sig's a little off (It's my sig on Kirby Wiki) ParaGoomba348 (C'mon, just talk to me) 01:51, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

I've yet to see any evidence that an infinite ban is not going to make it any better. In fact, I've been enjoying the peace and quiet. I'm sure I've never made any mention of you not contributing much--I regularly see and approve of your contributions, but you shouldn't lump yourselves into a group of users whose contributions are considerably less. As to the crew issue, it's just clear that you don't really understand what a crew is. Crews compete; to compete as a crew at a tournament earns you notability within the smash community as a crew and therein entitles you to an article. Nothin' personal, just cleaning up the wiki! :^) --RJM ^Talk 01:13, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Uhhh, could you unprotect my page. I need to make an archive... wait how do you make one? --Blue Ninjakoopa (talk) 02:36, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Just a hint: next time you want to belittle someone by using their number of contributions as a measure of their worth, this page is a much better way to do so.–Entrea Sumatae 03:40, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

I think the reason he didn't do that was precisely because he wasn't measuring the user's worth by the number of contributions ("less" quantitatively) but rather by the value of those contributions ("less" qualitatively). Whether or not that's a fair assessment is up to the reader to determine, but since you can't do so through Special:Editcount, I would posit that you've misunderstood his point. --Kirby King 21:28, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Well yes, click on any of the penultimate differences from those edit pages and I'm sure you won't be blown away by the quality of the contributions. Besides, Special:Editcount is a Wikia special page and I'm still living in denial! :^) --RJM ^Talk 22:07, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

I don't go out of my way finding edit counts to belittle people and in fact, consider it a pretty petty way to measure someone's worth. I'm using the history of banned users to illustrate an example--this isn't personal and howmanytimesdoIhavetoexplainthat!!?!? I. Am. Not. Attacking. ANYONE. Good grief... --RJM ^Talk 22:05, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Okey dokey. --Blue Ninjakoopa (talk) 22:26, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

I'd like to point something out in one of Randall's previous statements. You said a crew gains notability by competing in tournaments. Although I've brought up the Cult, I mean, Aftermath Dynasty several times, I'd like to prove Randall's point wrong (Randall, if you would like to contradict this statement, feel free to do so). If you read the article for this crew, you'll notice that most of its members (and possibly former members) have never been in a tournament. Even so, they have gained some notoriety, including on this Wiki (that is, until your bans). MarioGalaxy {talk} 22:45, 10 September 2008 (UTC)