User talk:Cookies and Creme/Archive 2

current talk page

Archive

1. 1

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)

Hello! Yes, I saw it a while back ago, so thanks for welcoming me! I'm mostly active on SmashWiki for the competitive stuff, but I try to help out on WikiBound from time to time. (Also enjoy the user box, tbh it isn't that great). CookiesCreme 20:15, 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. CookiesCreme 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)

Maybe in the near future, but not now. CookiesCreme 21:57, 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. CookiesCreme 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)

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). CookiesCreme 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? CookiesCreme 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 must have not noticed then. Well, that's on me. CookiesCreme 13:19, September 30, 2019 (EDT)

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)

No problem. If you need any more help on Smasher pages feel free to ask! CookiesCreme 14:20, 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)

Could you point that out for me (ie. can you link it)? CookiesCreme 21:51, 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?

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. CookiesCreme 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. CookiesCreme 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. CookiesCreme 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)