SmashWiki talk:New game procedure (original)

This looks mostly okay. Few notes though:

• I believe there is a way to confirm that a Miiverse post was made from a game, or was at least made by someone who has played the game. If there is, we can use such posts as sources, as we know they cannot be faked.
• If something has a whole ton of different single images from different sources, while none of the images themselves are proof enough, the sheer volume of them may be. For example say that after release we see about fifty different images of some new character, all in different poses on different stages. That's far harder to fake than a few images all on the same stage.
• The current standards are "SSB4-3DS" and "SSB4-Wii U" (fuller names) for categories, and "SSB4-3" and "SSB4-U" (single chars) for images/templates. I'm not sure which combo is better for articles:
  • "-3DS" and "-Wii U" are the full system names, but the lowercase in the latter is unusual.
  • "-3" and "-U" is short and distinct, but a lot of people will probably find "SSB4-3" in titles confusing.
  • "-3DS" and "-U" is simple and convenient, but the mix of "full" and "one letter" doesn't feel right.

Toomai Glittershine The Undirigible 11:39, 27 June 2014 (EDT)

How about "SSB3D" and Smash 3D for abbreviating the 3DS version since several 3DS titles say "3D" as opposed to "3DS" i.e. Star Fox 64 3D and Ocarina of Time 3D? ZeldaStarfoxfan2164 (talk) is a never lover boy 12:07, 27 June 2014 (EDT)

I agree that an exhaustive set of images might be legitimate, but it's harder to come up with an objective criterion for what would be considered "enough" for legitimacy. As for the abbreviations, my personal preference is for SSBU and SSB3DS in article titles and potentially in-article text, but I understand that my opinions on this aren't necessarily the consensus. I prefer not to use "Smash ___" as an abbrevation if possible, even if it means using SSB___ instead. Miles (talk) 12:18, 27 June 2014 (EDT)

Eh. I like SSB3D better, however, I am fine with both.

On a different note, I'm thinking that we should provide short blocks after 2 speculatory edits, and a longer block after persisting speculatory edits.Qwerty the lord Please click "lord" 15:57, 27 June 2014 (EDT)

During SSB4 early coverage, I mean.Qwerty the lord Please click "lord" 17:54, 27 June 2014 (EDT)

Unless that becomes an overwhelming problem, I think we can handle it on a case by case basis. Miles (talk) 18:17, 27 June 2014 (EDT)

If you're comparing SSB3D and Smash 3D, SSB3D is used in article titles whereas Smash 3D is used when mentioning the 3DS version in article bodies. ZeldaStarfoxfan2164 (talk) is bad for me 18:39, 27 June 2014 (EDT)

Is anyone even using the shorthand of "3D" for the handheld version and not "3DS"? I've only ever heard and seen references to it with "3DS", hence why I was advocating "SSB3DS". Miles (talk) 18:45, 27 June 2014 (EDT)

I've made some minor revisions; still accepting feedback for a bit longer before I try and put this into place. Miles (talk) 07:32, 29 June 2014 (EDT)

I'm not sure why you removed the "SSB4-U" and "SSB4-3DS" abbreviation options. If we're going to have "SSB4" in titles, which is a given, it makes no sense at all to leave out the "4" in the version-specific title options. (And then the hyphen is required, since "SSB43" etc is very poor.)

Actually, now that I think about it, this only matters at all for things like images and templates - it's not possible to have an article title like "Subject (SSB4-U)" or similar, because it'll be at "Subject (SSB4)", which covers its apperance in both versions. I cannot fathom how one subject would be so different between versions that it would need a separately-titled page like this. Toomai Glittershine The Aurum 09:58, 29 June 2014 (EDT)

I support all the things on the userpage at the time of this post. ♡FirstaLasto♥ 02:52, 30 June 2014 (EDT)

I too support this policy in its current form. The Miiverse policy will allow only people who're actually playing the game to contribute screenshots. intendrone⁴² 13:46, 30 June 2014 (EDT)

Question about the JP release

I wasn't around to know how the wiki handled Brawl's JP launch, so how would we handle things like menu options and move names that are only in Japanese? Would we roughly translate them and use them that way, then change them as soon as they're out in English, or would we refrain from making pages and such of Japanese names that are subject to change? intendrone⁴² 16:43, 3 July 2014 (EDT)

I see no reason to hold off on a page just because we don't know its English name; it should be easy enough to come up with a reasonable translation, and if not we can use generics (like how "Mega Man's Final Smash" is the current page title). Toomai Glittershine The Cloronic 17:10, 3 July 2014 (EDT)

Seconded with Toom. More or less the same policy I've seen in action over at Bulbapedia, where Japanese names are used prior to English ones being revealed. Miles (talk) 17:13, 3 July 2014 (EDT)

On a somewhat related note, any users who will be getting the Japanese version to help the research? Having people on the wiki gather info directly from the game might help us stay on top of the chaos that will inevitably ensue. intendrone⁴² 18:25, 3 July 2014 (EDT)

There's a store in my area that takes Japanese import requests. However, it takes a while; it's not like they just go over there on release day to pick it up and then immediately come right back over to give it to me. I have no idea if I would even get it before the NA release, so I doubt anyone will be able to get it unless they went to Japan themselves.

If I could go to Japan to buy it, I totally would. ♡FirstaLasto♥ 18:35, 3 July 2014 (EDT)

While it would certainly be nice to have an import copy to work with, it isn't hugely important. Worldwide access to Miiverse communities of other languages means we can easily have people dig through there for relevant screenshots. The only reason we could run into issues is if it's like the Pokemon X and Y community where screenshots aren't allowed, but that remains to be seen. Miles (talk) 18:38, 3 July 2014 (EDT)

Considering that Sakurai can upload images onto Miiverse from the game (with the icon that says he owns the game, like a normal post), it would be unusual if players couldn't do the same, especially since it would be an optimal platform for sharing screenshots and such. intendrone⁴² 18:45, 3 July 2014 (EDT)

Agreed that it's unlikely to be an issue. Just thought it warranted pointing out just in case. Miles (talk) 18:48, 3 July 2014 (EDT)

Leaks are not trustworthy sources / Considering recent leaks got video footage.

I propose revising this policy further: if there is nothing to confirm or deny the veracity of an unauthorized video, no information from it should be added to the wiki unless it can be confirmed by at least one other reliable source, preferably Sakurai or Nintendo. Videos may be hard to fake, but doing so is far from impossible. Bulbapedia doesn't have Volcana and Hoopa listed as Pokémon because they weren't confirmed even though they've been leaked- we should follow their example and keep in mind that even a convincing bootleg is not enough to confirm anything without substantial supporting evidence. We deal in facts, not rumors and speculation. --66.249.83.56 18:43, 25 August 2014 (EDT)

---

I think illegal leaks should NOT be covered. A rumor has been going around about a roster leak. And now there's a whole lot of pictures going around and there's even video footage to back up the rumors. But while there have been evidence that points to it being true, there's also evidence it might be fake such as the Duck Hunt Dog from deviantart, Shulk being in a similar pose to Little Mac, etc. I've gotta go to Tae-Kwon-Do now, so I'll let you discuss this. SeanWheeler (talk) 18:43, 25 August 2014 (EDT)

Can you provide the image from Deviantart of DHD? I can't find it anywhere. All I can find is the one that was stolen and expanded upon (poorly for that matter) from the leak. Laikue (talk) 19:08, 25 August 2014 (EDT)

I merged two simultaneous sections here, now I'll write a response. Toomai Glittershine The Indescribable 18:45, 25 August 2014 (EDT)

Okay so here's my response. The purpose of this policy was to codify how "strong" a leak must be in order to be treated as legit. Note that "leak" in this context is "any purported content not posted by Nintendo/etc", which this most recent leak would be, as would for example someone who buys the game early at a retailer that broke the street date. Your proposal is basically "don't cover leaks (outside the leak page) no matter how strong or obvious they may be". I respect this opinion, but at some point a leak may have so much evidence in its favour that continuing to ignore it is pointless. That's why this policy exists - to define where that line is, and as currently written the current leak crosses that line.

If I went off in the wrong direction for what you wanted to discuss, by all means set me straight, but if you want to change the policy you might want to try avoiding looking at this one specific leak (because it may restrict our perspective). Toomai Glittershine The Incomprehensible 19:03, 25 August 2014 (EDT)

Did we create pages for fighters implicated in the Gematsu leak when it first surfaced? We never did until they were officially confirmed. This case should be no different. Berrenta (talk) 19:16, 25 August 2014 (EDT)

Except this time, there is evidence in the form of a video. ChuckNorris 19:19, 25 August 2014 (EDT)

True, but we need to consider the chance that texture hacks and other types of video setup to create the footage were involved. Berrenta (talk) 19:27, 25 August 2014 (EDT)

If you've found evidence that those characters are Brawl hacks, then by all means, please show. --Lasifer 19:36, 25 August 2014 (EDT)

We drew a specific line, which this leak has now crossed. I've seen no evidence to support the claim of Shulk or Bowser Jr.'s gameplay being Brawl hacks. If you have such evidence, feel free to share it. As it stands, though, this leak has met our standards for legitimacy by providing clear and unambiguous video. Miles (talk) 19:40, 25 August 2014 (EDT)