User talk:Toomai/Archive 13

Okay I read through that, now you read the first post of this, and we'll call it even for now. Toomai Glittershine The Breegull 00:04, 12 June 2014 (EDT)

Additionally I hear Melee Powershielding reflection is back. Is there footage somewhere?--Brian^{Don't try me!} 15:41, 14 June 2014 (EDT)

I have not heard of this, though conceptually I can see it being one of the more likely Melee-only things to return (since unlike wavedashing/dashdancing/etc it wasn't an exploit). Toomai Glittershine The Celeritous 16:07, 14 June 2014 (EDT)

Update think Melee style teching is back?--Brian^{Don't try me!} 19:48, 21 June 2014 (EDT)

I'd hope so, given that a lot of Brawl's teching rules were bugs. You're pointing to the Greninja in that gif? Could you always double jump instantly after wallteching? Toomai Glittershine The Dispenser 19:52, 21 June 2014 (EDT)

In Melee, if you didn't use your double jump or up b prior to the tech, you could double jump before the wall jump animation. In Brawl, I don't think you could "cancel" the wall jump animation with a double jump or an aerial like I do here.--Brian^{Don't try me!} 20:03, 21 June 2014 (EDT)

I can't fix the powershielding gif.

It doesn't revert to the first version uploaded (with the red frame) no matter how many times I try.--Brian^{Don't try me!} 19:20, 18 June 2014 (EDT)

You have to do a hard refresh (usually Ctrl+F5) to see changes made to images. Toomai Glittershine The Glow 19:30, 18 June 2014 (EDT)

Status of Omega Tyrant

I would like to formally request a review of the behavior of Omega Tyrant as a SmashWiki admin. Repeatedly, in talk page discussions, he has demonstrated that rather than focus on the content of this wiki and how it should best be managed, he would rather lapse into personal attacks in a manner unsuitable for an admin. I am concerned that his behavior is increasingly vitriolic and it is becoming damaging to the reputation of SmashWiki and its administration. Omega Tyrant has a tendency to force any discussion into a back-and-forth, line-by-line dissection of large walls of text, and always replies continuously to ensure he gets the last word in. Of particular frustration is that he seems fixated on me as a target of his hostility, and he seems to be somewhat paranoid.

A few examples of the behavior I am concerned by:

These are just a few examples. I'm concerned that this consistent pattern of personal attacks and deflection from constructive discussion on the subject of improving the wiki is becoming increasingly problematic, and needs to be addressed. I await your thoughts on the matter. Miles (talk) 02:17, 19 June 2014 (EDT)

Hahaha, so instead of refuting me, you go crying to Toomai that I'm being mean? You are truly awful Miles.

"Omega Tyrant has a tendency to force any discussion into a back-and-forth, line-by-line dissection of large walls of text, and always replies continuously to ensure he gets the last word in."

Oh how dare I debate the infallible Miles, instead of just taking his word as absolute right. Seriously dude, you're going to complain that I debate back with you instead of just accepting you as right when you clearly aren't? You're that incompetent?

"Of particular frustration is that he seems fixated on me as a target of his hostility, and he seems to be somewhat paranoid."

Or you know, you're an awful out-of-touch admin with terrible judgement, who repeatedly abuses his power and status, constantly makes awful decisions and then obstructs any effort to undo it, while refusing any discussion about it, and constantly has to be told by another admin to knock his shit off? Fyi dude, I'm not the only one thinks this lowly of you, pretty much every establish user sees you as an awful admin the wiki would be better without, and the only reason no one will go through with trying to get you demodded is because of the lack of admins and users willing to try getting adminship. Have you ever done some self-reflection? Omega Tyrant 02:37, 19 June 2014 (EDT)

I have no interest in turning this into a virtual shouting match. I've presented my concerns, and now you've provided yet another example of why I'm concerned. Miles (talk) 02:46, 19 June 2014 (EDT)

"I have no interest in turning this into a virtual shouting match."

I.e. you have no refute.

"why I'm concerned"

Oh you should be concerned about your status, because I am watching you like a hawk, and when we get some other actual competent admins on board, you can bet I will be pushing for your adminship to be revoked. The wiki has no need for an obstructive admin with terrible judgement whose only beneficial use is janitorial duties. Omega Tyrant 02:54, 19 June 2014 (EDT)

Don't know if I'm being out of place here, but let me offer you my opinion, and feel free to ignore it, but... the fact of the matter is, to varying degrees, you're both being quite... well, blunt. OT, you seem to be forgetting that you don't have to argue with snark all the time, and at the end of the day, you're making comments that seem to be vitriolic. Now, perhaps they are, perhaps they aren't. But, there's the real problem, I can't tell. However, Miles, you've just blown this out of all proportion by taking it to Toomai's Talk, and have probably just set them off even further. And now, it's reached a point where you're both threatening each other with demotion. Now, I'm not sticking up for anyone here (OT especially, you need to calm a little before responding to something) but at the end of the day, demoting either of you is just going to end up inflaming the problem, which, from what I've seen, is generally not a good idea. So, just calm down, and resolve this dispute without threats, without "Virtual Shouting" and without all this aggro. ScoreCo un ter 04:24, 19 June 2014 (EDT)

"Don't know if I'm being out of place here, but let me offer you my opinion, and feel free to ignore it"

Yes, you should state it. While Miles typically carries an attitude that the views of non-admins do not matter if they goes against his, non-admins should always be involved if they got something constructive to say.

"OT, you seem to be forgetting that you don't have to argue with snark all the time, and at the end of the day, you're making comments that seem to be vitriolic."

Generally I'll agree, but my patience with Miles' asshattery, refusal to listen and debate dissenting views, and refusal to actually improve his problems, has ran completely out, and thus I will not filter out any of my statements towards him. If Miles insists on maintaining his detrimental behavior and abuse of his admin powers, I will not soften my words for him and will continue to make it be known how awful of an admin he is.

"And now, it's reached a point where you're both threatening each other with demotion."

This isn't a mere threat, it's something I have always maintained I was going to get a proper request of if Miles continued to show no improvement (which he of course has not). The only thing stopping me is because the wiki has so few admins that Miles' janitorial capabilities are actually needed (seriously, some of the viable users need to try getting adminship, so that there's no infinite job security and actual accountability for admins, so Miles can't keep pulling off his shit and get away with it).

"demoting either of you is just going to end up inflaming the problem"

Seriously, if it wasn't for the lack of admins, demoting Miles would be 100% beneficial to the wiki. Omega Tyrant 04:53, 19 June 2014 (EDT)

I feel that all user input will be valid, and comments like "calm down" won't solve anything. Here's my take: Omega Tyrant has never personally attacked Miles or any user for that matter. On personal attacks: comments like "You're being an idiot" are not the same as comments like "You're an idiot." One is describing a user acting unusually, sometimes with the word "stop" at the beginning instead of "you're," and the other is an outright personal attack. Use of swear words doesn't automatically turn a sentence into a personal attack, and it also doesn't denote hostility or "anger" (SmashWiki isn't censored anyway). Another thing about personal attacks is that they're only attacks if they're false. As for the validity of this discussion: It's legitimate because Miles is leveling a serious charge against OT, and the end results will be important for the future of the wiki's adminship and how it's perceived (do we want out of touch, borderline robotic admins to dictate what constitutes permissible content on the wiki, or do we want admins serious about maintaining the wiki and upholding its policies?). Now, when you read the Ridley talk page and the section of interest, you clearly see Miles not refuting (or even bothering to respond to) Omega Tyrant's argument about Ridley's status in SSB4. OT even admitted that there isn't a way to know whether Ridley will be a playable character or a stage hazard, pointing out similarities to Sakurai's shenanigans with Palutena and how Sakurai likes to swerve Miiverse followers. Miles' reactions to Omega Tyrant's walls of text show that he doesn't really expect anyone to disagree with him (repeated statements like "I've been an admin for 5 years" or "I don't feel like dealing with your walls of text," violating this and SW:YAV to an extent, because said reactions imply that Miles' comments just quash OT's), which is unbecoming of an admin. You say Omega Tyrant's walls are indicative of paranoia, and then say that he "seems to target you" when you make yourself prone to debates by reverting his edits and not properly defending the reason(s) you reverted them (or not providing good reasons at all)? Sorry, Miles, but I have to call you out here. blue ninjakoopa 05:46, 19 June 2014 (EDT)

I fear I've been misunderstood. I'm not just saying "Calm Down" in a cushy sense, I'm saying that if everyone goes against each other completely, the ability for rational argument disappears. In terms of this dispute, all parties need to step back, think about what they're saying, and be rational about it. Which they are doing. Besides, I' don't think Toomai wants all this clutter. ScoreCo un ter 05:56, 19 June 2014 (EDT)

I think I'm going to dig up a post I made back in April, because I think it's still relevant to this discussion:

“	Maybe I shouldn't be getting involved, but I'm somewhat new, and when I've made mistakes I've apologized and tried to learn from them, to which OT has responded to without "rudeness". Although I'm not the right person to decide the proper conduct for the situation being discussed, I at least know that OT isnt rude to people who own up to their mistakes. Just wanted to throw that in there.	”
—User_talk:Omega_Tyrant/Archive_14#Y'know, it's about time you get called out.

Basically, OT has little tolerance for people doing silly things and not attempting to learn from it or acknowledging that it was silly after recieving scrutiny. From what I've seen, Miles fits the latter model rather well, and thus he has recieved much "feedback" from OT about his behaviour. I do believe that OT gets more worked up about these things than he needs to, or at the very least, reacts more forcibly than is effective, but I hardly think that it constitutes a demotion.
All that said, it does seem like some personal attacks have been going on here. "I am watching you like a hawk", among other things on this page, suggest so. ♡FirstaLasto♥ 06:49, 19 June 2014 (EDT)

Well let's get this straight here.

Miles asserts that OT is a crass, disrespectful admin that cares more about winning debates than anything else.
OT asserts that Miles refuses to change with the times and will claim he is right regardless of discussion.

These are the assumptions I'll be working off here. If one of the two involved believe I have their claim wrong, then set me straight in 30 words or less in the same format as above. You get one chance at this, so make sure you get it right the first time. If you don't follow these instructions, or you're not one of these two admins, don't comment, or I might block you for lacking reading comprehension. Toomai Glittershine The Yellow 11:02, 19 June 2014 (EDT)

That is an apt summary, though I'd add one clarification: I'm pushing for OT to change his attitude, not for his demotion. Miles (talk) 12:55, 19 June 2014 (EDT)

I do not intend to demote anyone as of this time. I want to collect the shortlist of what you two think of each other so I can try and get something arbitrated without going that far (which wold need community support in any case). Toomai Glittershine The Breegull 13:08, 19 June 2014 (EDT)

I simply wanted to clarify that since I realized I may have given a slightly inaccurate impression. That was all. Miles (talk) 13:13, 19 June 2014 (EDT)

This is a little over 30 words, but it has to be expanded, as it's simply not just "he think he's always right"; he actively refuses discussion on the matter, while obstructing any attempts to fix his fuckups, abusing his admin status in the process, until another admin beats him into submission (or a b'crat tells him to knock his shit off, showing his ego and lack of respect for those he doesn't see as being of "higher status"). Omega Tyrant 19:59, 19 June 2014 (EDT)

I am concerned because with OT it seems to be a lose-lose situation in every instance where we disagree. If I reply line-by-line to his wall-of-text talk page posts as he seems to desire, all that happens is him repeatedly generating an equally long response. If I don't do so, he declares himself as having won for supposedly not being refuted. This kind of win-every-argument behavior is closed-minded and inappropriate. And before accusations are thrown my way, I would point out that I was trying to get other people's opinions on the subject and asking questions about where they were coming from so I could better understand the viewpoint I didn't immediately share. I am a stubborn person sometimes, I will fully admit. But I am working harder on admitting my screwups and trying to improve on myself. Miles (talk) 12:37, 20 June 2014 (EDT)

"If I reply line-by-line to his wall-of-text talk page posts as he seems to desire, all that happens is him repeatedly generating an equally long response."

Because you never put up valid arguments? And only assert yourself to be right? Do you even know how arguments work?

"f I don't do so, he declares himself as having won for supposedly not being refuted."

If you don't bother respond back, you have no refute. You can't be unwilling to discuss/argue something, and then keep enforcing what you want on the article. And you know, other users are calling you out for your one argument being bullshit. It's not just me, get the fuck off your high horse already.

"This kind of win-every-argument behavior is closed-minded and inappropriate."

Or you know, I'm trying to keep good content/keep off bad content, and am fully willing to argue for it? Don't whine that someone dares argues back with you, you are not infallible and you do not have the ultimate word. Stop being so damn lazy and egotistical.

"And before accusations are thrown my way, I would point out that I was trying to get other people's opinions on the subject and asking questions about where they were coming from so I could better understand the viewpoint I didn't immediately share."

No you fucking weren't, you just asserted you were right, that I was being ridiculous, whined to Toomai that the mean old tyrant opposed you, and never once said "what do other people think?

"I am a stubborn person sometimes, I will fully admit. But I am working harder on admitting my screwups and trying to improve on myself."

No you don't, you just keep on doing the same old shit over and over and over and over again, and then just whine when someone calls you out on your shit, or flatout ignore them (nice to completely ignore BNK there). You have been an admin for nearly six years now, and you keep proving yourself to be an abusive lazy robotic terrible out of touch dinosaur with a serious ego problem. It's such a shame that back in 08, just being a good editor with no competition would impress the masses and get you adminship, because the wiki has been stuck with such a horrid admin that will not give up his position. I guarantee if you ran a RfA today, you would fail hard.

As for something directed at the wiki, seriously, someone fucking get a successful RfA made already. The wiki needs more admins, so we can oust Miles already. This guy made a joke of us on AiB with parading our name around while doing the same shit there as a mod that he does here, and is actively stunting wiki progress. SmashWiki really needs him out of their administrative ranks, he has repeatedly demonstrated himself to be lazy, robotic, out of touch, unwilling to change, unwilling to discuss matters that don't agree with him (and then whines when people force him to), repeatedly abusive of his power to obstruct fixes to his fuckups, egotistical and thinking whatever he thinks is infallibly right while his status makes him better than other users, and most importantly, has terrible judgment.

Also, as a call to users, voice your problems with Miles here. Instead of just talking shit about him on IRC, say it here to his face. Miles must be shown that the established userbase disapproves of his administrative capabilities. Omega Tyrant 01:43, 23 June 2014 (EDT)

Independently of OT's call to action, I'm just going to state my opinion of both admins

Omega Tyrant: You're basically the blunt admin around here. Yes, it's nice to have someone who will argue to the fullest extent to achieve the goal that they desire, but at some point, your arguments do seem to be focused on just utterly dominating the enemy so that you get what you want. Arguing is nice, but, from an outsider's opinion, your responses seem to be somewhat fueled by anger, if even by the slightest degree. A leader cannot rule by fear and make rash decisions, but should instead take a step back and see things from both sides. It honestly just frightens people to have to argue with you, and intimidation is not ideal to have in a community. I do admire your efforts to be the strong, guiding force of the Wiki, but do realize that in the end, your arguments are pretty aggressive, which isn't something that most people respond well to, if at all.

Miles: To summarize, you're viewed as a bumbling admin who seems to try to get things done right, even if the progress is pretty slow. A Detective Gumshoe of sorts in that sense. Your overall response to Wiki events and stuff seems to be slow and sometimes disconnected from the community at hand, but I will definitely give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that real life is just weighing you down; my wiki presence has certainly lessened due to real life (if it is real life stuff, actually confirm that or something to give us a better understanding of the Wiki drama). Your arguments occasionally come out with your opinion being given as if we knew about your thoughts, but we need blatantly obvious answers from you as an admin. Some of us are intelligent folk, while some of us aren't so intelligent, and the meaning of words gets diluted from the transition from thought to actual communication. I really do hope that you learn from your mistakes and follow through on that bit about improvement, especially seeing as how the only person who has really commented on your mistakes at all is OT, and at some point, you probably got tired of hearing it from him, but just remember: "When something knocks you down, you need to learn to get up". No matter the past, no matter the criticism or insults, you can always improve if you yourself have the strong dedication to try. Mega Tron1 XD 03:43, 23 June 2014 (EDT)

While you have a good post, there a few things I'll have to refute. "Real life" isn't an excuse here, when Miles has been doing this shit for over three years now. If Miles really has such long lasting real life shit that somehow turns him into such a disconnected terrible admin that can't be assed to ever improve and adapt, then he should just give up his adminship and focus on those real life things, as the latter is clearly a greater priority.

"your arguments do seem to be focused on just utterly dominating the enemy so that you get what you want."

This is a pretty terrible way to look at it. If I'm truly wrong and can't refute, I do back down; I'm not arguing to "get what I want", it's arguing to keep good content on/keep bad content off, and arguing it to my full ability, I'm not going to halfass it. If you're going to call fully arguing for content to be "trying to get what you want", then every competent user is guilty of that, and in which case, it doesn't matter, as the wiki couldn't function properly if people wouldn't argue for disputed content.

Regarding my aggressiveness, see what FirstaLasto said, as well as my response to ScoreCounter; I am normally much more subdued than this, it's when dense users who keep repeating their shit is when I get especially aggressive with them. Omega Tyrant 04:19, 23 June 2014 (EDT)

Since you trolls appear to be serious about keeping at each others' throats, I guess I should make it public now: I've been passing around a survey to the trustable userbase, asking leading questions to get some opinions of your twos' general respetability and responsibility. I don't have a lot of results so far, but even now it's clear: pretty much everyone agrees that you two need to shut up, sit down for a while, and really think about your status as staff here.

Since it's public now, I might as well distribute the survey publicly: E-mail me or IRC me for a link to the survey. If one of the two admins involved wants to participate, contact me and I'll send you a special version. The survey's existance is public now, but keep the contents secret.

This discussion is now closed until I get more survey results. But know this you two: It's clearly unhealthy for the wiki to continue like this. I suggest you recognize this and turn to self-reflection to fix the problems, before I'm forced to demote one or both of you. (Yes, both is on the table.) Toomai Glittershine The Emissary 09:35, 23 June 2014 (EDT)

For the record, some people have been telling me they're unconfortable with "demotion" being thrown around a lot in both this discussion and the survey. With respect to the discussion, while I'm not going to say that demotion is not an option, it's only something I'm going to look at if a large majority of survey results are clamoring for it (and even then, we'd go through an on-wiki process first). With respect to the survey, I'm intentionally asking leading questions to better control the responses and get a better look at thought processes.

I currently have 13 respondants. I'll see if we can get to 15, but if not, I'll do something with the results in a day or two. I would have liked to get input from other bureaucrats, but they're all inactive. Toomai Glittershine The Altruistic 10:19, 25 June 2014 (EDT)

I know this might be a private kind of thing but mind if I can voice my opinion too or I'm not worthy yet. Dots (talk)

The NES 11:47, 25 June 2014 (EDT)

I think it's better just to ask for the survey at this point, since that'll actually get your opinion noticed in a more impactful way. On that note, I'd ask for it, but I don't think I have enough insight on the situation aside from being around when Miles first became an admin (plus his tenure on AiB) and then occasionally witnessing his spats with OT years later. MarioGalaxy_^Talk 14:39, 25 June 2014 (EDT)

Yeah, I was just simply asking for the survey thing. Dots (talk)

The Ocarina of Time 15:15, 25 June 2014 (EDT)

If you were around to see Miles make SmashWiki a complete joke on AllisBrawl with his horrible moderating capabilities while parading our name around without us being being ok with it, then you are fully qualified to take the survey (on that note for people taking the survey, remember Miles' moderating on AiB, he's the #1 reason why SmashWiki is viewed so terribly by the AiB and competitive Brawl communities). Omega Tyrant 17:24, 25 June 2014 (EDT)

Alright, Clarinet Hawk hasn't satisfactorily responded to my request for opinion, so I guess I have to finish this myself. To do so I'll be creating a new subpage, watch for it in the near future (a day or two). Toomai Glittershine The Obfuscating 10:55, 25 July 2014 (EDT)

Name change?

Can you make me MintyGuy700 please? Link PWNS (talk) 21:08, 26 June 2014 (EDT)

Just to make sure you want to do so, wait two or three days and post here again. Toomai Glittershine The Cloronic 22:20, 26 June 2014 (EDT)

Yes, I'm sure, also, why'd you want me to wait a few days? Link PWNS (talk) 22:11, 28 June 2014 (EDT)

I do it to ensure that whoever's asking for the name change is serious about it; it gives them a chance to change their mind in case they decide they're not 100% sure, and if they forget to remind me then they probably didn't want it that much to begin with. Toomai Glittershine The Brazen 22:44, 28 June 2014 (EDT)

You have studied game design philosophy right?

So there's a debate on the merits of L Canceling so far and I'd like some logic from the people who are against it. Here's the thing I'm confused about. How in the world could brawl's "solution" of removing the mechanic without making aerials less laggy be a better game choice? I get that it lowers the barrier of entry, but it needlessly removed many options from other characters and limits the potential fun you can do with the game? Smash 4 seemed to have retained this "solution" and I can't fathom why any good player would be ok with this.--Brian^{Don't try me!} 19:33, 2 July 2014 (EDT)

In a nutshell, games are fun because of choice. If you present a choice that is clearly superior (in this case, "L-cancel" or "don't L-cancel"), then obviously you're always going to pick the better one, and it ceases to be a real choice. L-cancelling adds an element of skill without an element of choice. Removing L-cancelling adds an element of both skill and choice. Can you afford the landing lag if you use this attack here? Or should you use it earlier to autocancel but risk missing or hitting with the sourspot?

Now, I suppose you can argue from this that having L-cancelling adds more choices, and so should be kept. But having too much choice can also be bad for a game - making the most of limited choices can also be fun (like those rooms in the original Legend of Zelda where you cannot leave without losing a Heart Container or paying 100 Rupees, or Divekick). It's a difficult pair of feelings to balance even for the experts. Sakurai clearly feels that he went a little overboard with choices in Melee (it's pretty much an embarrassment of riches in terms of options, which obviously the community likes but the creator has second thoughts about) and has dialed things back. Toomai Glittershine The Inconceivable 20:53, 2 July 2014 (EDT)

Two things:

1. Why is the compromise solution of having L cancels automatic considered by Sakurai and Brawl/Smash 4 supporters inferior to Brawl's method?

2. I don't believe removing L Cancels adds meaningful skill in the context of a fighting game. Your example is a choice of resource management: a perfectly good skill to test in completing an RPG. However in a fighting game, aside from execution, the main test of skill is how players fight in neutral (playing RPS using their options). (I understand you may not see smash games as fighting games, but at high level, this type of strategy is very much apparent). A skilled player wins neutral by putting himself in situations where his options have a better risk/reward ration than his opponent's option. In your example, if you have to make a choice of using a laggy aerial or a sourspot spot, clearly the risk/reward ratios don't favor your options and you should't have put yourself in situation in the first place. --Brian^{Don't try me!} 22:07, 2 July 2014 (EDT)

If L-cancels are automatic, what's the point of having them? It's not even a technique at that point, it's just identical to reducing landing lag across the board, and that's apparently not an option. Toomai Glittershine The Interspacial 22:43, 2 July 2014 (EDT)

Why isn't it an option? It encourages standing still instead of getting dirty. Even casuals love throwing themselves in a fight. Sakurai isn't logical apparently.--Brian^{Don't try me!} 23:12, 2 July 2014 (EDT)

The purpose of landing lag is to help balance how you can basically interrupt an aerial at any time by landing. To be honest, it begs the question of why L-cancelling existed in the first place. Toomai Glittershine The Awesome 23:27, 2 July 2014 (EDT)

You do realize L Canceled aerials are still unsafe if they don't hit anything. They are generally only safe on shield and even then most of them have to be spaced and timed properly. L cancels exist to help you approach with aerials and to not make blocking that powerful of an option. In the RPS of fighting games. Blocking is supposed to be the safest option, but it should be very unrewarding and used as a last resort if you cannot outright dodge the attack.--Brian^{Don't try me!} 23:42, 2 July 2014 (EDT)

I was just wondering...

Hi Toomai! This question isn't about editing, etc. I just wanted to know, what 1st party characters would you want to see playable in SSB4? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bug Man Stan (talk • contribs) 15:59, July 5, 2014 (CDT)

This is not appropriate talk page usage. Please read SW:TALK before you make another post. Also, remember to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). MeatBall104; With a rubber soul! 22:48, 5 July 2014 (EDT)

People can ask questions like this on user talk pages, but definitely not on article talk pages. Awesome Cardinal 2000 10:00, 6 July 2014 (EDT)

This would be more appropriate on the forums. ZeldaStarfoxfan2164 (talk) is made in America 11:18, 6 July 2014 (EDT)

“	Beyond conversations about edits to the wiki, minor outside conversations are perfectly acceptable. However, do not extend these into being chat rooms, message boards, and/or e-mail accounts.	”
—SW:UTPG

--- Monsieur Crow, Author Extraordinaire, 12:11, 6 July 2014 (EDT)

Back

I'm back from my traveling and can be more active again. Do you still want me to weigh in on the above shitshow, and/or are there other things that I need to be aware of from the past month. I can be on IRC tomorrow if that's better, as well. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 22:49, 6 July 2014 (EDT)

Yeah I'd appreciate discussing the mess on IRC tomorrow. Toomai Glittershine Da Bess 23:37, 6 July 2014 (EDT)

Okay I'm ready. Toomai Glittershine Da Bomb 13:09, 7 July 2014 (EDT)

Got held up in traffic coming home. Can we do later tonight or tomorrow? Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 17:52, 8 July 2014 (EDT)

I think Marth's grab range got nerfed again.

See this.

Source

What do you think?--Brian^{Don't try me!} 20:08, 8 July 2014 (EDT)

Items again

Remember when I talked to you about making boxes for the items (which also encompasses Pokémon and Assist Trophies)? Well I have finished them for the original, Melee and Brawl! (I didn't make boxes for Wii U and 3DS because there weren't the images I needed) I actually added them into the pages, with very good looking boxes, the problem here are the beliefs that surround the wiki. Miles just removed them excusing himself that items are optional, by far the most silly reasons I've heard for not including the items on the main pages. I mean there is no excuse to not talk about smash Bros. and not mentioning the items. I wanted to end that huge fencing that makes everybody ignore the items. That the items can be turned off with the item switch doesn't mean we can't count on them, Smash Bros, outside the competitive scene, is well known for three things: 1. The characters whom you can use and play with to kick other characters, 2. the complex stages each with unique features to hinder the player or set a more fair enviroment, 3. and the wide variety of items which spawn in the stages, for those who want a crazy fest where no one has the advantage. Which fighting game encourages you to use items? only Smash Bros.! Perhaps the only problem was not talking to somebody else other than you about this, but I tried to change something that was out of my hands doing it alone, now that I can't add the boxes back I need to consult with other people, that's why I am now requesting your help.

--Byllant (talk) 22:30, 8 July 2014 (EDT)

If the only real issue is "not talking to somebody else other than you about this", why not go to an article's talk page and discuss it there, instead of having one-on-one discussions with users? Toomai Glittershine The Glow 23:50, 8 July 2014 (EDT)

Because I wrongly assumed people will let them stay, that all would agreed, that is wasn't really needed to consult with anybody (other than you). Where's the place I should go and take this proposal, I've seen there's no proposal system like the Mario Wiki's one.

--Byllant (talk) 02:54, 11 July 2014 (EDT)

You can use the main page's talk page or the proposal page. The latter was definitely not as easy to find as I'd like it to be. You can also just make a new forum if you think that this is a topic that'll receive enough comments to deserve it, but your call. Mega Tron1 XD 02:59, 11 July 2014 (EDT)

IRC?

Would you mind getting on? I need to ask you something. blue ninjakoopa 00:09, 17 July 2014 (EDT)

Can we get a Subspace Emissary game icon?

Due to how big SSE is and how there are a lot of separate elements thematically from the rest of Brawl, it may be a good idea for the headers of pages that specifically deal with SSE to get their own icon, rather than the generic Brawl one. I'd do it myself, but since you've been the icon guy and have all the source files, I figured I'd ask you in order to keep things consistent.

What I would do design-wise is take your Brawl icon, turn the swipe purple (like how the X in the Japanese Brawl logo was turned purple for SSE), and replace the B with the green Subspace symbol in the style of the English SSE logo. VinLAURiA (talk) 02:56, 25 July 2014 (EDT)

You mean, something to use instead of

in {{ArticleIcons}}? I guess I could, but first I'd rather have the purpose of something like that discussed on the relevant talk page, because I currently can't think of one. Toomai Glittershine The Dispenser 10:03, 25 July 2014 (EDT)

Alright then, discussion is up. VinLAURiA (talk) 04:03, 27 July 2014 (EDT)

Mii Gunner/Swordfighter icons

May you create the icons (the ones [to be] used in tier lists) for the versions of the Gunner/Swordfighter as seen in the artwork? Red (talk) 20:37, 25 July 2014 (EDT)

Adding new fields in Game Systems Infobox Template

Hello. I was trying to add new fields for "First game released" and "Latest game released" for the Game System Infobox Template - my edit is primarily concerning the Game Boy (universe) page, where I wanted to include the Alleyway and Wario Land 2 listings seen in this revision (when the infobox was based on Series as opposed to Game System).

However, I tried previewing the results, but the fields aren't displaying properly. Is there a way I can rectify this issue? Thanks in advance for your help. Fenyx4 (talk) 15:38, 8 August 2014 (EDT)

I undid your adding of those fields with this edit. As explained in the edit summary, it's not a given that a console has a single "first game" as opposed to a group, and "last game" will be changing constantly as new games come out (maybe not for the Game Boy, but for the 3DS and Wii U) and won't always be notable or even relevant to the wiki. If you'd like to debate this, you should probably do so on the template's talk page. Toomai Glittershine The Spectrum 16:00, 8 August 2014 (EDT)

Thanks for clarifying. In retrospect, I think the listing of "first/latest game(s)" would probably be better suited to game series rather than game consoles, as "launch games" for systems do tend to arrive in groups, as you mentioned, with series rarely releasing multiple games at once or debut or recency (excluding Pokémon, with most of the paired versions coming later in a system's lifetime, anyway). The varying degrees of relevancy to the wiki are another point; I suppose that any relevant first/recent games can always be mentioned later on in a given videogame console's article. Fenyx4 (talk) 16:40, 8 August 2014 (EDT)

Rosalina --> Rosalina & Luma

Can you settle this by moving it? Consensus is toward a move. RoyboyX Talk 17:17, 8 August 2014 (EDT)