|
NOTE: I respond to almost all messages posted on my talk page. If you posted something, expect an answer from me. |
Hi
Don't know if your still active on Wikibound but I left a little present on your talk page if you want to see it. (And yes I took your userbox if you don't mind, if you want mine then you take it) SupαToαd64, the Best 
20:12, September 24, 2019 (EDT)
Nickelodeon SSB
What other Nick characters would you think be the other SSB characters? Maybe Squidward as Inkling? 174.55.24.64 21:50, September 27, 2019 (EDT)
- Ooh the speculation would be fun... unfortunately they aren't actually on the image. Maybe I could do a separate section dedicated to such speculation? And yes, Squidward as Inkling would work, I also thought Swiper as Joker. Cookies
Creme 21:52, September 27, 2019 (EDT)
- You should make that a sandbox. And you can add Sans too. 174.55.24.64 21:54, September 27, 2019 (EDT)
IP talk page discussion
Remember to quietly deal with proven vandals, which includes keeping discussion to a minimum. This avoids needlessly bloating a discussion, especially if it's made clear that a resolution won't ever be reasonably reached. 
Nokii — 00:28, September 28, 2019 (EDT)
- Here's the thing, I truly believed he was doing it in some sort of good faith and still is. I don't necessarily think it's vandalism, per se, just stubbornness. Anyways, yes I did get carried away at some points, I'll just be more careful. Cookies Creme 00:29, September 28, 2019 (EDT)
- If I may put up a defense, Cookies is right. The IP was not a vandal and meant good faith, but at the same time the IP did not read the policy and was stubborn to listen to our warnings, and so was edit warring and trying to push his opinion about Shadow. We were basically trying to explain how he was going against the policies, and telling him why his edit was unacceptable while showing false points he added, but he wasn't listening, and at the same time he was taking our responses the wrong way. In a way yes his edit would be considered vandalism, but he was inexperienced and didn't intentionally mean bad faith, so the rule doesn't fully apply for this instance.SupαToαd64, the Best
07:16, September 29, 2019 (EDT)
- Agreed: the IP clearly wasn't stupid. They knew exactly what the warnings meant, but decided that they didn't matter because they were "right". They were just extremely biased and ignorant, hence why I thought it would be "fun" to entertain them (I actually had a response to their last post typed out, but the page was archived before I could post it). In my defense, I had completely forgotten that I reported this IP for vandalism over a month ago (granted I didn't bother reading what they actually posted back then), although the fact that they was willing to respond to the people reminding them about policy (in their own twisted way) partially renders that moot. Though frankly, considering he can still post on their talk page, I don't really know why they stopped. - EndGenuity (talk) 09:55, September 29, 2019 (EDT)
- If I may put up a defense, Cookies is right. The IP was not a vandal and meant good faith, but at the same time the IP did not read the policy and was stubborn to listen to our warnings, and so was edit warring and trying to push his opinion about Shadow. We were basically trying to explain how he was going against the policies, and telling him why his edit was unacceptable while showing false points he added, but he wasn't listening, and at the same time he was taking our responses the wrong way. In a way yes his edit would be considered vandalism, but he was inexperienced and didn't intentionally mean bad faith, so the rule doesn't fully apply for this instance.SupαToαd64, the Best
SW:QDV
This kinda flies in the face of QDV. Attempting to converse with people like DBF is generally counter-productive. Alex the Jigglypuff trainer 13:11, September 30, 2019 (EDT)
- I actually questioned whether I should post, but QDV didn't really say much about handling sockpuppets other than assume they aren't, which this one obviously is. I wasn't really baiting them, and I did ask on Discord whether it was a good idea (albeit after posting it). Cookies Creme 13:12, September 30, 2019 (EDT)
- I should probably add that I thought I should at least warn him about it, if he does it in the future it's straight to admin's noticeboard and nothing else. Is this fair or does that not work? Cookies Creme 13:13, September 30, 2019 (EDT)
- He's been warned about this many times. He's well aware that what he's doing is wrong, but he does it anyway. Alex the Jigglypuff trainer 13:18, September 30, 2019 (EDT)
- I should probably add that I thought I should at least warn him about it, if he does it in the future it's straight to admin's noticeboard and nothing else. Is this fair or does that not work? Cookies
ty.
Just wanted to post ty for the meipon info. He should have had an article a year ago also.--PPS KoRo, King of Smash 64 Knowledge, and bad grammar....and bad puns (talk) 11:51, October 3, 2019 (EDT)
Fighters That Count as "Humans"
I'm starting to question if I'm actually accurate about one of my trivial facts I made weeks (if not months) ago... --NinTylo (talk) 21:50, October 3, 2019 (EDT)
"Yoshi is the only character who doesn't face humans for opponents." Questions: - Do angels like Pit & Dark Pit count? Much less Godesses like Palutena? (Cause I'm clearly aware that Bayonetta is a human witch while Cloud has a few chimeric traits) - I get that Ganondorf, Wii Fit Trainer, and I can obviously argue that the Mii Fighters (even in their costumes) are humans by canon. Not to mention Pokemon Trainer and Pikachu fight the former cause they're commanding their Pokemon in the background to fight. - Link and Zelda have elf ears, but are a human species, so it's more or less they're considerable humans, not to mention Wario has the same characteristic ears, right? - (And finally) We have Samus' obvious echo Dark Samus, who, although she was a naturalized Phazon alien-being is human... in hybrid; so does Samus echo actually count? --NinTylo (talk) 11:54, October 4, 2019 (EDT)
Cause I'm only really thinking of Yoshi having no humans of any shape or form (especially since Pokemon Trainer is absent from Ivysaur and Charizard's rounds)...
- If Yoshi is truly the only character who doesn't face human characters, then I'd say it's unique and deserves a trivia point.
- I would consider Pit and Dark Pit to be angels rather than humans, however they are humanoid and aren't creatures, so technically they can fit under the human category (as do the other characters you have listed). On the other hand, Pokémon Trainer doesn't do the fighting, rather his/her Pokémon do, so I won't consider the playable character as humanoid. Finally, I don't have much knowledge of Metroid Prime, but I don't believe Dark Samus wouldn't be considered a "human" since she's an alien. Cookies Creme 22:08, October 3, 2019 (EDT)
Well, Dark Samus WAS considered a human HYBRID, so I don't know if that should count either... should it? --NinTylo (talk) 22:17, October 3, 2019 (EDT)
- If you want a reference, Dark Samus is not considered a human on Metroid Wiki. Cookies Creme 22:21, October 3, 2019 (EDT)
Then that settles it. Samus is the only other character besides Yoshi to have no humans for opponents, despite Dark Samus possessing human-like traits... right? --NinTylo (talk) 22:31, October 3, 2019 (EDT)
As far as I know, yes. Cookies
Creme 22:42, October 3, 2019 (EDT)
- Actually, Humans are separate races in both Zelda and Kid Icarus, of which their representatives are not. (Being Hylians, Gerudo, Angels, and God respectively) Dark Samus also isn’t considered to be human at all. Being a clone made of Metroid using only “info” of Samus. Bayonetta, Cloud, and Wario are 100% humans. (For all the previously mentioned characters, a quick check on their wiki pages will tell you the same) I believe most people consider Wii Fit Trainer and the Miis as, and actually are, humans. Characters like Link, Pit, and Mewtwo are human-like as they either resemble, act like, or seem like humans, but aren’t actually humans themselves. 172.58.168.2 01:32, October 4, 2019 (EDT)
Then techincally speaking, shouldn't the trivial point be that only Yoshi does not face characters with humanoid characteristics? (Cause Dark Samus has some despite not canonically being considered a human) --NinTylo (talk) 11:54, October 4, 2019 (EDT)
- No, because some of the characters Yoshi faces have “human-like” qualities. (Koopalings, Bowser, Ridley) Both Yoshi and Samus only face non-human characters, primarily because the Pokémon Trainer themself is absent when fighting their Pokémon. Dark Samus only “seems” human due to having a resemblance to Samus, of which is actually only of her suit. Dark Samus only looks like Samus’ suit because the information given to DS was of Samus in her suit. Dark Samus definitely does not look like a human when her face is shown. If they’re not classified as even 0.1% human in their home series, then they’re not human in Smash. Actually, not counting WFT or the Miis, Olimar and Alph can be considered not “humans” due to coming to a planet other then Earth, being Hocotate and Koppai respectively. In fact, their wiki doesn’t state what race they are, unlike Link, Pit, Bayonetta, Cloud, and Wario who do get classified on their wikis. So does Rosalina who is a human. Heroes 4 & 8 from Dragon Quest are Half-human, half-Zenithian, and Half-human, half-Dragovian respectively, but still human. Other non-playable Heroes of Dragon Quest are either half-human or become human by their game’s end. The main trivia point is that both Yoshi and Samus don’t fight any humans, of which is true. I would suggest going to a character’s respective wiki to see what race they are to see if any other characters don’t face any humans. 172.58.169.219 13:27, October 4, 2019 (EDT)
DK's Dab not allowed in the Super Mario Wiki
Hello! It looks DK's Dab is not allowed to be mentioned in the Super Mario Wiki. Behold! I shall use my powers to take you to the Super Mario Wiki! Here it is! It's the reason why it should be mentioned in the SmashWiki instead.
- First, sign your posts with ~~~~
- Second, just because it's allowed in Super Mario Wiki doesn't mean it's allowed on SmashWiki. We are two different wikis, and we only list Smash facts, not Mario Kart facts. Cookies Creme 19:26, October 7, 2019 (EDT)
Try adding DK's dab in the Donkey Kong article in the Super Mario Wiki.
- No. Drop this nonsense about DK's dab already, it's not allowed here nor Super Mario Wiki. Cookies Creme 19:33, October 7, 2019 (EDT)
Okay! Nonsense dropped. Yup! I guess it's a nonsense to both wikis. Okay... but there's this animation for DK's neutral air that looks like he is "doing the dab". Take a look at this [1]. Maybe it's only that DK's Dab FROM MARIO KART 8 is not allowed on either wiki. HELLO! Are you here? Come on!
- Don't rush me, I have a life outside this wiki.
- As for the animation, it's somewhat of a stretch, plus even if it can be interpreted as a dab it's very minute. Finally, we rarely ever add memes onto the wiki unless it has gained significant traction, which this one hasn't. Cookies Creme 20:25, October 7, 2019 (EDT)
- Lemme put it bluntly: None of us wikis care about the dab so we ain't adding it in. SupαToαd64, the Best 20:29, October 7, 2019 (EDT)