User talk:KingKRool868

SW:WAR

Hey, if someone reverts an edit don't go and revert that edit as well, as it's an edit war. Rather, bring it to the talk page.

As for the edit, there's nothing ironic on King K. Rool's latest non-Smash appearance being in a non-DK game. CookiesCreme 12:46, January 21, 2021 (EST)

Bringing this up. Taunts are likely not used in competitive play due to leaving players open to punishes. It doesn't need to be pointed out that taunts are made to mock players. You were warned about edit warring so I advise you read up on that policy. Omegα Toαd, the Toαd Wαrrior. (BUP) 19:28, January 22, 2021 (EST)

Bumping to admin warning. Keep it up and you'll earn yourself a block. Aidan, the Rurouni 19:53, January 22, 2021 (EST)

Cut this out. Seriously. CookiesCreme 12:20, February 17, 2021 (EST)

SW:WORDS

I suggest you read Words to Watch, namely the "Editorialising" section. These edits to Dark Samus and Ridley don't add anything useful. In fact they make it sound less professional. --CanvasK (talk) 21:35, January 21, 2021 (EST)

Grammar

Please make sure you use the correct grammar when making edits, especially with punctuation. CookiesCreme 12:57, January 31, 2021 (EST)

I should specify some of your edits that you should keep an eye on when editing:

• here, there should be commas around "reused."
• here, the wrong "its" is used.
• In the last 2 edits and here, there needs to be commas around "however"
• Finally, here, you capitalized "w" for no reason.

In the future, re-read what you added or use "show preview" before submitting. CookiesCreme 14:33, January 31, 2021 (EST)

"Not everybody knows that"

There are many things people don't know, e.g. chainsaw was created by Bernhard Heine. It's really flimsy reason for a trivia, and the Kamikaze one simply isn't that much interesting. "You know what I am referring to the kamikaze move" - are you assuming that I know what do you mean because I asked you? What?

Also make sure your spelling is correct before saving edit. Superbound (talk) 12:09, February 17, 2021 (EST)

To clarify on spelling:

"Kamikazee is also the only special move that was intentionally designed to be a sacrificial KO unlike other moves in that same catergory."

1) You spelled "catergory" wrong 2) there should be coma (,) before "unlike" (what Cookies reminded you above). If you're using Google Chrome you can enable spellchecker in your settings, or you can download grammar checking program like grammarly. It's very helpful for me at least. Superbound (talk) 13:04, February 17, 2021 (EST)

Reminder: There is a policy in place that prohibits multiple reversions of the same edit. Please refrain from reverting or repeating an edit that has already been undone. Instead, bring the subject up on the article's associated talk page.

Seriously. You have repeatedly edit warred with me, Superbound, Cookies & Creme, and a few other people over the past couple months. Not to mention that you have even been blocked for edit warring before. You need to stop doing that. If you have any grievances about any reversions, then take it to a talk page for a civil discussion. Please don't make us tell you this again. Black Vulpine of the 🦊Furry Nation🐺. Furries make the internets go! :3 20:13, February 17, 2021 (EST)

Yet ANOTHER reminder of this. Once again, if you have a grievance about a reversion, take it to that article's talk page. Black Vulpine of the 🦊Furry Nation🐺. Furries make the internets go! :3 20:30, March 19, 2021 (EDT)

That was their first revert there, they weren't edit warring yet, and Aidan's edit summary didn't provide real reasoning in the first place, so I see no reason to be yelling at them here. Omega Tyrant 21:01, March 19, 2021 (EDT)

Reverting an edit that was itself a revert is considered edit warring under 1RV. Technically, Aidan didn't use undo, as he was removing content added over 2 edits, but the edit was still a revert. Alex the Weeb 21:04, March 19, 2021 (EDT)

As stated to you before, everyone gets one revert, and often minor editing disputes will get resolved this way without having to get bogged down in talk page arguments. KingKRool868 here has done nothing wrong yet with having only reverted once so far, especially so when Aidan didn't provide a proper edit summary in his revert. More disruption is being caused here by yelling at this user for their singular revert, rather than just reverting them with a proper edit summary and telling them to bring it to the talk page to discuss the trivia point farther if they still disagreed with the revert reasoning. Omega Tyrant 22:13, March 19, 2021 (EDT)

I really think you should have a read of SW:WAR, because that's not how 1RV works at all... Alex the Weeb 05:39, March 20, 2021 (EDT)

It's not an edit war because Aidan reverted first and he made the second revert. If he made a revert first, then reverted Aidan's revert then it would be an edit war, but that was not the case here so he's not guilty of edit warring. Omegα Toαd, the Toαd Wαrrior. (I'm the best!) 06:39, March 20, 2021 (EDT)

"It takes two participating users to start an edit war. As such, if a user reverts an edit, one should not revert their revert, and instead should use the article's talk page to dispute the reversion should they disagree with it". Alex the Weeb 06:42, March 20, 2021 (EDT)

I highly doubt you want to be dusting off that old chestnut. Last thing we need is another argument on the fundamentals of 1RV, especially when you yourself still have yet to repair those glass panes you damaged before. Black Vulpine of the 🦊Furry Nation🐺. Furries make the internets go! :3 08:35, March 20, 2021 (EDT)

That's a pretty low blow, and you know it. I came here because I watched this whole situation come down, and OT's misunderstanding of 1RV was just going to confuse this user even further than they already are. I'm quoting directly from the current version of 1RV, which itself is actually a less restrictive version of the original policy, but nevertheless a violation of it has occurred. If you think what I'm saying is inaccurate, be sure to let me know what I said which was incorrect, but otherwise, the only one trying to start an argument here is you by punching down at me when I'm trying to resolve a situation which has become confused. Alex the Weeb 08:43, March 20, 2021 (EDT)

Do not go pointing fingers at each other guys, that's only going to cause more disruption. Point is while this user in particular has a history of edit warring, this disbute was already minor to begin with and wasn't a full fledged disruptive edit war that requires a warning. Plus while I too don't believe the trivia was noteworthy, he didn't fully understand Aidan's summary which should've been written a little better. Omegα Toαd, the Toαd Wαrrior. (I'm the best!) 09:28, March 20, 2021 (EDT)

(Reset indent) I admit to not having written a descriptive edit summary, and concede that only one word doesn't really do the job, however if I'm removing information and asking "so?" (which I have done in the past) then that probably means that I personally don't believe the information has any relevance there. In response to the edit itself, it shouldn't matter if a move is or isn't a special move in its game of origin, simply because there's only three fighting game franchises in this game with playable characters, and one of the three barely even has "moves" as it is. All of the other special moves are just based on abilities the characters have (or are simply made up for the series). Aidan, the Rurouni 11:17, March 20, 2021 (EDT)

"Sub-universes"

While there is obviously no ignoring the fact that Yoshi, Donkey Kong, and Wario are all Mario-related series, it's somewhat missing the point to lump them all together when Smash generally leans towards counting them as separate franchises despite their overlap. Given that "sub-universe" is already a made-up term without specific definition, I don't see the benefit in leaning too hard into them being one thing when we don't have any real need to. We already acknowledge the relatedness of these games in other ways. (Also, you should refresh yourself on SW:1RV.) Miles (talk) 17:27, June 16, 2021 (EDT)

Stop adding unnecessary fluff

Hey, please stop adding unnecessary and speculative fluff to places that definitely don't need it. There's no reason to state that Kazuya's up throw doesn't have a camera shift in 1v1 because the move isn't supposed to do that in any format. In addition, stating that Ganondorf's up tilt is like a smash attack is rather speculative. CookiesCreme 13:59, July 8, 2021 (EDT)

This editing behaviour

...is absolutely not okay. First off, the scathing manner of wording you're trying to insert is directly in violation of SW:NPOV. Second, you're not allowed to revert good-faith edits without an edit summary. Third, you are breaching SW:WAR AGAIN. Please adjust your attitude before you edit further. Black Vulpine the 🦊Furry🐺. Furries make the internets go! :3 18:10, October 5, 2021 (EDT)

Also, you've been making a lot of bad trivia edits, read our trivia guidelines before editing another trivia section. Omega Tyrant 08:27, October 6, 2021 (EDT)

This and this are unacceptable; not only do you blatantly edit war again with clearly unacceptable edits after being told not to do that shit several times, you do it through an IP, like we won't notice that IP is you. With such a severe transgression and having a troubled history here, you can take a lengthy block, and if you try pulling anything like that again when your block is up, the next block will be a year or more. Omega Tyrant 19:23, October 9, 2021 (EDT)